VU1 T 

ci.avi Bk.ms.^ 


THE  ETHEL  CARR  PEACOCK 
MEMORIAL  COLLECTION 

Matris  amori  monumentum 


TRINITY  COLLEGE  LIBRARY 


DURHAM,  N.  C. 

1903 

Gift  of  Dr.  and  Mrs.  Drcd  Peacock 


f t 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2015 


https://archive.org/details/historyofromansu71meri 


VI  i Cl  % 


HISTORY 


OF 

THE  ROMANS 

UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


BY 


CHARLES  MERIVALE,  B.D., 


LATE  FELLOW  OF  ST.  JOHN’S  COLLEGE,  OAMBEIDOa. 


FROM  THE  FOURTH  LONDON  EDITION. 
WITH  A COPIOUS  ANALYTICAL  INDEX. 


VOL.  VII. 

Zb  3 o S 


HE V YORK: 

D.  APPLETON  AND  COMPANY, 
1892. 


93  7 

M 3 <°  3 

JC? 

COOTE^TS 

OF  THE  SEVENTH  VOLUME. 


CHAPTER  LX. 

Chan,  ;ter  of  the  Flavian  or  Antonina  Era. — Restoration  and  maintenance  of  peace  by 
Vespasian. — Reaction  from  the  extravagance  of  recent  times. — Vespasian’s  habits 
and  policy. — Census  and  financial  measures. — New  Forum  and  Temple  of  Peace. — 
Endowment  of  the  rhetoricians  and  teachers  of  literature. — The  philosophers  ex- 
pelled from  Rome,  and  execution  of  Helvidius  Prisons. — Demolition  of  Nero’s 
Golden  House. — Baths  of  Titus. — The  Colosseum. — Death  of  Vespasian,  a.d.  79: 
a.  u.  832. — Titus  assumes  the  Empire. — Relations  of  Titus  with  Berenice. — Favour 
with  which  he  was  regarded  by  the  Romans. — His  death,  a.  d.  81 : a.  it.  834 ; and 
character. — Destruction  of  Herculanum  and  Pompeii,  and  death  of  the  elder  Pliny. — 
A.  D.  71-81 : A.  u.  824-834.  .......  Page  7 


CHAPTER  LXI. 

Domitian  emperor. — His  education  and  character. — External  history  of  this  reign. — Cam- 
paigns of  Agricola  in  Britain,  a.d.  78-84:  a.  u.  831-837. — He  is  recalled  from  the 
conquest  of  Caledonia. — Domitian’s  expedition  against  the  Chatti,  a.  d.  84:  a.  u.  837. 
— He  claims  a victory,  and  assumes  the  title  of  Germanieus. — Fiscal  necessities  and 
commencement  of  confiscations. — Campaigns  against  the  Dacians. — Defeat  and 
death  of  Fuscus. — Victory  of  Julianus. — Peace  with  the  Dacians,  a.  d.  90 : a.  u.  843. 
— A pretended  Nero. — Successes  in  Africa. — Revolt  of  Antonius,  a.  d.  93 : a.  u.  846. — 
Renewed  cruelties  and  alarms  of  Domitian.  .....  63 


CHAPTER  LXTI. 

Internal  history  under  Domitian. — His  character,  and  strength  of  the  evidence  agatnr.l 
it. — His  reign  an  epoch  of  reaction. — He  affects  to  he  a reformer  of  manners.-- 
Measures  in  honour  of  the  Gods. — Prosecution  of  unchaste  vestals. — Fate  of  Cor- 
nelia.— Enforcement  of  the  laws  of  adultery. — The  Scantinian  Law. — Laws  against 
mutilation. — Restrictions  imposed  on  the  mimes. — Decree  against  the  Chaldaeans  and 
philosophers,  a.  d.  89. — Economic  measures. — Restoration  of  the  Capitol. — Ascription 
of  Divinity  to  Domitian. — Cult  of  Isis  and  Cybele. — Tribute  enforced  on  tho  Jews. — 
Death  of  Clemens,  and  alleged  persecution  of  the  Christians. — Domitian  as  a govern- 


4 


CONTENTS. 


or.  administrator,  and  legislator. — He  countenances  delation. — Favours  the  soldiers.— 
Caresses  the  populace. — Spectacles. — The  Capitoliue  and  Alban  contests. — Patronage 
of  literature  repaid  by  flattery. — Domitian’s  grim  humour. — The  Council  of  the  Tur- 
bot, and  funereal  banquet. — Death  of  Agricola,  A.  D.  93;  with  suspicion  of  poison: 
followed  by  proscription  of  senators,  and  second  edict  against  the  philosophers. — 
Reign  of  terror. — Domitian’s  personal  alarms. — He  is  assassinated  by  his  freedmen, 
A.  d.  96. — (A.  d.  81-98 : a.  u.  834-349. 1 .....  Page  98 


CHAPTER  LXIII. 

Accession  of  Nerva. — Reaction  against  the  tyranny  of  Domitian  moderated  by  the  clem- 
ency of  Nerva. — The  Praetorians  demand  the  punishment  of  Domitian’s  assassins. — 
Association  of  Trajan  in  the  Empire. — Death  of  Nerva,  A.  D.  98 : A.  u.  851. — Origin 
and  early  career  of  Trajan. — Ilis  position  and  operations  on  the  Rhenish  frontier.— 
Roman  fortifications  between  the  Rhine  and  Danube. — Trajan’s  moderation  and  popu- 
larity in  Rome. — Pliny’s  Panegyric. — Expedition  against  the  Dacians,  A.  n.  101. — Tra- 
jan crosses  the  Danube. — His  successes  and  triumph,  A.  n.  103. — Second  expedition, 
A.  D.  104. — Bridge  over  the  Danube. — Conquest  and  annexation  of  Dacia. — The  Ul- 
pian  Forum  and  Trajan's  Column  at  Rome. — Conquests  in  Arabia. — Trajan’s  archi- 
tectural works  in  the  city  and  the  provinces. — Vigilance,  splendour,  and  economy  of 
his  administration. — His  personal  qualities,  countenance,  and  figure. — (a.  d.  96-115: 
A IT.  849-868.) 158 


CHAPTER  LXPV. 

Effect  of  the  Flavian  reaction  on  Roman  literature. — Comparison  of  Lucan  and  Silius 
Italicus : of  Seneca  and  Quintilian. — Pliny  the  Naturalist. — Scholastic  training. — Ju- 
venal compared  with  Persius:  Statius  with  Ovid:  Martial  with  Horace. — The  His- 
torians: Tacitus:  ingenuity  of  his  plan.— His  prejudices  and  misrepresentations. — 
Prevalence  of  biography. — Tacitus  and  Suetonius. — Uncritical  spirit  of  historical  com- 
position.— Memoirs  and  correspondence. — Pliny  the  Younger. — Interest  attaching  to 
his  Letters. — Mutual  approximation  of  the  philosophical  sects. — Prevalence  of  suicide. 
— Corellius.  — Silius.  — Arria.  — Corruption  of  society. — Military  manners.  — Life 
among  the  intelligent  nobles. — Spurinna. — Pliny  the  Elder. — Pliny  the  Younger. — 
Villas  of  the  nobility. — The  Laurentine  and  Tuscan  of  Pliny  — The  Surrentine  of 
Pollius.— Decline  of  masculine  character  among  the  Romans.— Exceptions.— Tacitus 
and  Juvenal  masculine  writers. — Contrast  in  their  tempers.— Last  champions  of  Ro- 
man ideas. 220 


CHAPTER  LXY. 

General  expectation  of  a Deliverer  favoured  by  Augustus  and  Vespasian.  Revival  of 
Judaism  after  the  fall  of  Jerusalem.— The  schools  of  Tiberias— Numbers  of  the  Jews 
in  the  East. — Seditions  raised  and  suppressed. — The  Christians  regarded  with  sus- 
picion as  a Jewish  sect. — Alleged  decrees  of  Nero  and  Domitian.  Persecution  in 
Bithynia,  and  Letters  of  Pliny  and  Trajan,  A.  d.  Ill : A.  tt.  864. — Martyrdom  of  Igna- 
tius.— The  Church,  the  Canon,  and  Episcopacy. — Trajan’s  expedition  into  the  East 
A.  o.  114:  A.  IT.  867.— Earthquake  at  Antioch,  a. d.  115— Annexation  of  Armenia.— 


CONTENTS. 


5 


Trajan  s conquests  beyond  the  Tigris. — Overthrow  of  the  Parthian  monarchy. — Tra- 
jan launches  on  the  Persian  Gulf. — Is  recalled  by  defections  in  his  rear. — His  ill  suc- 
cess before  Atrae. — He  returns  to  Antioch. — His  illness  and  death  at  Selinus,  A.  D.  11T : 
A.  it.  8T0. — Revolt  of  the  J ews  in  the  East : in  Cyprus,  Cyrene,  and  Egypt. — Revolt 
in  Palestine. — Akiba  and  Barcochebas,  leaders  of  the  Jews. — Suppression  of  the  re- 
volt.— Foundation  of  the  colony  of  -Elia  Capitolina. — Final  separation  of  the  Chris- 
tinas from  the  Jews. — (a.  d.  111-133 : a.  tx.  864-886.)  . . . Page  279 


CHAPTER  LSYI. 

Birth  and  parentage  of  Hadrian. — His  education  and  accomplishments. — His  rise  under 
Trajan’s  guardianship. — His  alleged  adoption  and  succession. — He  abandons  Trajan’s 
conquests  in  the  East. — His  campaign  in  Haxsia,  A.  D.  118. — Suppression  of  a con- 
spiracy against  him. — He  courts  the  senate  and  the  people. — Hadrian’s  first  progress, 
— He  visits  Gaul,  Germany,  Spain,  Mauretania,  confers  with  the  King  of  Parthia. 
visits  Athens,  Sicily  and  Carthage,  A.  d.  119-123. — His  seeond  progress : he  resides  at 
Athens,  Alexandria,  and  Antioch : Character  of  learning  and  society  at  these  cities 
respectively. — He  revisits  Athens,  and  returns  finally  to  Borne,  A.  J>.  125-134. — His 
buildings  at  Rome. — Adoption  of  Ceionius  Verus,  A.  D.  135,  who  dies  prematurely. — 
Adoption  of  Aurelius  Antoninus,  A.  D.  138,  who  adopts  Annius  Yerus  and  L.  Verus. — 
Infirmities  and  death  of  Hadrian,  A.  d.  138. — His  character  and  personal  appearance. — 
A.D.  117-138:  A.' u.  870-891.) 821 


CHAPTER  XLVH. 

Early  career  of  the  emperor  Antoninus  Pius. — Attitude  of  the  Barbarians. — The  wall  of 
Antoninus  in  Britain. — His  paternal  government  at  home. — His  indulgence  to  the 
Christians.— His  virtues  and  happiness. — Vices  of  the  empress  Faustina. — Early 
promise  of  M.  Aurelius. — His  testimony  to  the  virtues  of  Antoninus. — Death  of  An- 
toninus Pius,  and  remarks  on  the  character  of  his  epoch. — Review  of  the  political 
elements  of  Roman  society. — 1.  The  populace  of  the  city. — 2.  The  provincials. — Pro- 
gress of  uniformity. — Extension  of  the  franchise. — Development  of  the  civil  law. — 
3.  The  Senate:  its  pride,  pretensions  and  imbecility. — 4.  The  praetorians  and  the 
legions. — The  final  supremacy  of  the  soldiers  inevitable. — (a.  d.  138-161 : a.  u.  891- 
914)  ...  895 


CHAPTER  LXVHI. 

M Aurelius  Antoninus  sole  emperor. — Association  of  Verus. — Disturbances  abroad  and 
calamities  at  home. — Verus  conducts  a war  with  Parthia. — Joint  triumph  of  the 
emperors,  166. — Administration  of  Aurelius  at  Rome. — Inroads  of  the  Germans, 
Scythians  and  Sarmatians  on  the  Northern  frontier. — Pestilence  spread  through  the 
Empire  by  the  legions  returning  from  Syria. — The  emperors  advance  to  Aquileia,  167. 
— They  cross  the  Alps,  168. — Return  and  death  of  Verus,  169. — Aurelius  on  the 
Danube. — His  v.ctory  over  the  Quadi,  174. — His  domestic  troubles. — Unworthiness 
of  his  son  Commodas. — Licentiousness  of  his  consort  Faustina. — Revolt  and  death  of 
Avidius  Cassius,  175. — Aurelius  in  the  East. — He  returns  to  Rome  and  triumphs  over 


6 


CONTENTS. 


the  Sarmatians,  176. — Repairs  again  to  the  Danube. — His  successes  oyer  the  Barba 
rians,  and  death,  180. — Compared  with  Alfred  the  Great. 

Symptoms  of  decline  of  the  Empire. — 1.  Contraction  of  the  circulation. — 2.  De- 
crease in  population. — 3.  Effects  of  vice,  arising  from  slavery.— 4.  Exhaustion  of 
Italian  blood,  ideas,  and  principles. — 5.  Effect  of  pestilence  and  natural  disturbances. 
—Revival  of  superstitious  observances  and  persecution  of  the  Christians. — The 
“Commentaries”  of  M.  Aurelius. — Stoicism. — New  Platonism. — Revival  of  positive 
beliefl — Christianity. — Conclusion. — (a.  d.  161-180:  a.  tj.  914-993.)  * Page 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


UNDER  TEE  EMPIRE. 


CHAPTER  LX. 


A.  D.  71-81.  A.  U.  824-834. 


CHARACTER  OF  THE  FLAVIAN  OR  ANTONTNE  ERA. RESTORATION  AND  MAINTEN- 
ANCE OF  PEACE  BY  VESPASIAN. REACTION  FROM  THE  EXTRAVAGANCE  OF 

RECENT  TIMES. VESPASIAN’S  HABITS  AND  POLICY. CENSUS  AND  FINANCIAL 

MEASURES. NEW  FORUM  AND  TEMPLE  OF  PEACE. ENDOWMENT  OF  THE 

RHETORICIANS  AND  TEACHERS  OF  LITERATURE. THE  PHILOSOPHERS  EXPELLED 

FROM  ROME,  AND  EXECUTION  OF  HEL VIDIUS  PRISCUS. DEMOLITION  OF  NERO’S 

GOLDEN  HOUSE. BATHS  OF  TITUS. THE  COLOSSEUM. DEATH  OF  VESPASIAN, 

A.  D.  79,  A.  U.  832. TITUS  ASSUMES  THE  EMPIRE. RELATIONS  OF  TITUS  WITH 

BERENICE. FAVOUR  WITH  WHICH  HE  WAS  REGARDED  BY  THE  ROMANS. HIS 

DEATH,  A.  D.  81,  A.  U.  834;  AND  CHARACTER. DESTRUCTION  OF  HERCULANUH 

AND  POMPEII,  AND  DEATH  OF  THE  ELDER  PLINY. 


E now  approach  a period  of  Roman  history,  dis- 


tinguished by  the  general  prosperity  of  the  admin- 


istration, the  tranquil  obedience  of  the  people,  Tbe  FIavian  or 
and,  with  a single  exception,  by  the  virtue  and  riod°ofUEoman 
public  spirit  of  the  rulers.  The  period  thus  fa-  hlstorr- 
vourably  characterized,  embraces  eight  reigns,  and  about  an 
hundred  and  ten  years,  from  the  accession  of  Vespasian  to  the 
death  of  M.  Aurelius.  It  has  been  usual,  indeed,  to  confine 
this  famous  interval  of  good  government  within  narrower 
limits,  by  making  it  commence  after  the  death  of  Domitian ; 


3 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  71. 


and  it  Las  been  generally  designated  by  the  name  of  the  An- 
tonines,  the  last  two  of  the  emperors  it  includes.  But  both 
the  limitation  and  the  designation  seem  to  me  inappropriate. 
The  Antonines  thus  referred  to  occupy  in  fact  but  forty  years 
of  this  period,  while  the  name  they  bore  was  perpetuated,  in 
compliment  to  their  virtues,  through  several  ensuing  reigns ; 
and  if  we  are  to  speak  of  an  Antonine  period  at  all,  we  ought 
to  extend  it  to  the  death  of  Alexander  Severus.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  era  of  peace  and  legal  government,  which  we  have 
been  taught  to  associate  with  the  title  of  Antonine,  was  really 
introduced  by  V espasian ; and  the  system  commenced  by  him 
which  remained  in  force,  with  but  one  interruption,  above  a 
century,  might  more  justly  and  more  intelligibly  be  styled 
the  Flavian.  Though  founded  on  a military  revolution,  this 
system  was  marked  by  the  utmost  outward  deference  for  the 
senate.  In  the  respect  they  showed  to  this  antique  image  of 
aristocratic  authority,  Vespasian,  Trajan  and  the  Antonines 
were  not  surpassed  by  Augustus  himself,  while  other  success- 
ors of  Augustus  had  scarce  pretended  to  respect  it  at  all. 
For  more  than  a century  the  long  struggle  between  the  im- 
perator  and  the  nobility,  between  the  army  and  the  senate, 
the  sword  and  the  gown,  the  struggle  which  had  drained  the 
life-blood  of  Rome  from  Marius  to  ISTero,  slumbered  in  re- 
pose. The  claims  of  the  contending  powers  seemed  to  be  re- 
conciled; the  real  authority  remained,  no  doubt,  with  the 
military  chief,  but  the  semblance  was  imparted  to  his  rivals 
with  a grace  and  a show  of  liberality  Avhich  cajoled  them 
into  complacent  acquiescence.  After  the  death  of  Aurelius, 
or,  more  properly,  with  the  accession  of  Septimius  Severus, 
the  spell  was  once  more  broken,  the  veil  was  rent  asunder, 
and  the  senate  could  never  again  be  deceived  into  a belief  in 
its  sovereign  authority.  One  or  two  faint  attempts  to  reas- 
sert it  were  speedily  and  harshly  suppressed,  and  the  last 
sparks  of  independence  were  finally  extinguished  in  the  ad- 
ministrative revolution  of  Diocletian  and  Constantine. 

It  is  not,  however,  in  the  pretended  government  by  the 
senate,  a mere  shadow  of  sovereignty,  that  the  peculiar  feat- 


V.  U.  S24.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


9 


ures  of  the  period  now  before  us  are  traced.  Of 
the  eight  Caesars  in  succession  from  Vespasian 
downwards,  one  only  was  a debauchee  and  a ty- 
rant ; seven  were  men  of  sense  and  vigour,  able  rulers,  just 
and  beneficent  administrators.  This  unexampled  series  of 
good  princes  in  an  absolute  monarchy  has  been  regarded  as 
a fortunate  accident ; but  it  is  not  fair  to  ascribe  it  to  acci- 
dent only.  The  men  were  the  product  of  their  times,  and 
were  legitimate  representatives  of  the  class  from  which  they 
sprang,  the  military  aristocracy  of  the  empire.  With  the 
single  exception  above  cited,  they  had  all  been  trained  from 
youth  in  habits  of  discipline  and  the  discharge  of  public  du- 
ties ; they  had  learnt  to  obey  before  they  were  called  upon  to 
govern ; a training  which  seldom  failed,  under  the  stern  tra- 
ditions of  Roman  education,  to  make  men  of  conduct  and 
self-control.  At  the  same  time,  the  habits  of  their  age,  chas- 
tened by  suffering,  and  sobered  from  the  debauches  of  the 
youth  of  the  empire,  did  not  tempt  them,  as  then-  predeces- 
sors had  been  tempted,  to  the  gross  extravagance  and  cynicism 
which  disgraced  the  nobles  of  the  Julian  and  the  Claudian 
court.  The  age  was  better,  as  we  shall  see,  and  the  men  who 
represented  the  age  were  accordingly  better  also. 

A period  thus  marked  by  virtue  in  the  highest  places,  and 
by  moderation  and  sobriety  in  the  ranks  beneath  is  naturally 
deficient  in  incident.  Still  more  is  the  Flavian 
period  deficient  in  historical  records.  Tran-  deficient  in 

records. 

quillity  at  home  and  success,  for  the  most  part, 
abroad,  can  furnish  few  events  of  stirring  interest,  and  few 
characters  attractive  or  instructive.  Accident  has  deprived 
us  of  that  large  portion  of  Tacitus’s  Histories  in  which  the 
career  of  Vespasian  and  his  sons  was  doubtless  narrated  in 
the  fullest  detail.  The  voluminous  recital  of  Dion  is  reduced, 
almost  at  the  same  moment,  to  a meagre  abridgment ; the  bi- 
ographies of  Suetonius  become,  as  he  approaches  his  own 
times,  unaccountably  slight  and  superficial.  Although  the 
century  before  us  was  prolific  in  historical  composition,  we 
possess  none  but  the  slightest  fragments  of  contemporary 


10 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  I).  71. 


narrative.  Our  materials  for  history  must  be  gathered 
almost  wholly  from  indirect  sources  ; from  letter-writers,  pan- 
egyrists, satirists  and  philosophers;  from  the  scattered  inti- 
mations of  coins  and  inscriptions,  or,  as  a last  resource,  from 
the  vague,  unfaithful  compilations  of  later  ages.  The  Fla- 
vian or  Antonine  period  has  indeed  attracted  the  notice  of 
many  modern  students,  aud  has  been  eulogized  by  some  as 
a period  of  great  and  exceptional  happiness  for  mankind.1 
It  has  been  sketched  in  essays,  in  which  a partial  collection 
of  facts,  or  a skilful  disposition  of  light  and  shade,  has  sufficed 
to  give  to  it  precisely  those  features  and  characteristics 
which  harmonized  with  the  writer’s  previous  conception.  It 
will  he  my  task  to  lay  before  the  reader  an  ample  narrative 
of  the  events  recorded,  with  such  a delineation  of  the  state  of 
affairs  as  our  imperfect  information,  and  my  own  prescribed 
limits,  will  allow. 

If  the  triumph  over  Judea  was  celebrated,  as  we  may 
conjecture,  soon  after  Titus’s  return  from  the  East, — that  is, 

in  the  middle  of  the  summer  of  824, — it  would 

Vespasian  ...  _ 

closes  the  tem-  Dearly  coincide  with  the  anniversary  of  Ves- 
ple  of  Janus.  . . J 

pasian  s assumption  of  the  purple  two  years  pre- 
viously.2  The  imperator  was  now  in  his  sixty-second  year; 
old  enough  to  feel  fatigued  by  a long  ceremonial  in  which  he 
took  personally  no  interest.  He  was  prouder,  we  may  be- 
lieve, of  the  distinguished  son  who  shared  his  triumph,  than 
of  the  acclamations  with  which  he  was  himself  saluted,  and 
complained  of  his  own  weakness  in  accepting  in  his  old  age 
honours  to  which  he  had  little  claim  from  his  origin,  and 

1 I need  scarcely  refer  the  reader  of  Roman  History  to  the  early  chapters 
of  Gibbon’s  History,  which  are  animated  throughout  by  this  idea,  or  to  the 
paragraph  headed  “general  felicity,”  near  the  end  of  ch.  2.,  in  which  it  is 
more  distinctly  indiouted.  A few  years  later  Hegewisch  worked  it  out,  with 
special  reference  to  Gibbon’s  views,  in  a formal  treatise,  on  “ The  Epoch  of 
Roman  History  which  was  the  happiest  for  the  Human  Race  ; ” by  which  he 
does  not  mean  the  happiest  epoch  of  all  history,  an  extravagance  which  seems 
to  have  been  reserved  for  a very  recent  essayist. 

a The  accession  is  dated,  it  will  be  remembered,  from  the  salutation  by  the 
army  at  Caesarea,  July  17.,  u.  c.  822,  a.  d.  69. 


A.  U.  824.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


11 


which  he  so  little  coveted  as  the  reward  of  his  achievements.1 
The  descent  of  the  victor  from  the  Capitol,  and  the  return  of 
his  soldiers  to  their  quarters,  were  followed  by  the  solemn 
announcement  of  peace  restored  to  the  empire.  The  new 
Augustus  closed  once  more  the  temple  of  Janus,  which  had 
stood  open  since  the  German  war's  of  the  first  princeps ; or, 
according  to  the  computation  of  the  Christian  Orosius,  from 
the  birth  of  Christ  to  the  overthrow  of  the  Jewish  people : for 
the  senate  had  refused  to  sanction  Hero’s  caprice  in  closing  it 
on  his  precarious  accommodation  with  Parthia.2  hi ever  be- 
fore had  this  solemn  act  addressed  the  feelings  of  the  citizens 
so  directly ; for  in  the  recent  season  of  war  they  had  been 
made  to  taste  more  nearly  and  more  painfully  of  its  horrors 
than  at  any  time  since  the  days  of  Marius  and  Sulla.  They 
had  undergone  a mutiny  of  their  legions,  a revolt  in  their 
provinces,  the  bitter  hostility  of  a rival  nation  not  yet  broken 
to  subjection;  and  all  these  perils  had  been  enhanced  by  the 
irruption  of  barbarian  hordes,  in  more  than  one  quarter, 
within  their  frontiers.  But  these  troubles,  however  terrible, 
were  counted  as  nothing  in  comparison  with  the  strife  of 
Romans  against  Romans  within  the  limits  of  Italy,  even 
within  the  walls  of  Rome  itself.  F or  a moment,  the  emperor, 
the  senate  and  every  other  authority,  had  fallen  beneath  the 
heels  of  a tumultuous  soldiery,  and  the  laws  had  succumbed  to 
the  furious  violence  of  the  camp.  The  civilization  of  eight  cen- 
turies had  lain  at  the  mercy  of  worse  than  barbarian  frenzy. 

The  preservation  of  the  empire  from  so  many  perils 

’ Suet.  Vesp.  12. : “ meritove  plecti  qui  triumphum,  quasi  aut  debitum  ma- 
joribus  suis  aut  speratum  unquam  sibi,  tarn  inepte  senex  concupisset.”  In  a 
similar  spirit  he  was  wont  to  jeer  at  the  folly  of  men  who  alfected  the  Empire : 
“ stultitiaa  arguens,  qui  ignorarent  quanta  moles  molestiaque  imperio  inesse.’’ 
Yictor,  de  Ccesar.  9. 

2 Orosius,  viL  3. ; from  a lost  passage  of  Tacitus : “ sene  Augusto  Janus 

patefactus usque  ad  Yespasiani  duravit  imperium.”  The  frontier 

wars  of  Rome  could  hardly  be  said  at  any  moment  to  have  entirely  ceased; 
but  the  transient  lull  of  hostilities  on  the  conclusion  of  peace  with  Parthia, 
a.  d.  63,  just  before  the  outbreaks  on  the  Rhine  and  in  Palestine,  was  perhaps 
as  complete  as  at  any  time  previous  or  subsequent. 


12 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  71. 


around  it  and  within  it,  is  one  of  the  most  remarkable  events 
Tranquillity  of  °f  our  history.  Yet  this  is  not  the  first  time 
the  provinces.  that  jn  the  mjtlst  0f  local  rebellions  and  central 
dissension,  the  great  hulk  of  the  provinces,  instead  of  rising 
in  one  mass  against  their  conquerors,  had  remained  passive 
under  a yoke  which  it  might  seem  easy  to  shake  off  for  ever. 
The  same  phenomenon  had  occurred  during  the  contests  of 
Caesar  and  Pompeius,  and  again  Avhen  the  whole  Roman 
world  was  convulsed  by  the  struggle  of  Octavius  and  An- 
tonius.  If  the  frantic  resistance  of  the  Jews  gave  birth  now 
to  no  sympathetic  movements  among  the  subject  races  of  the 
East ; if  in  the  W est  the  revolt  of  the  legions  excited  no 
general  outbreak  of  the  nations  from  which  they  had  chiefly 
sprung ; if  the  convention  of  the  states  of  Gaul  had  separated 
with  a resolution  to  stand  aloof  from  the  military  mutiny, 
and  the  prospect  of  an  independent  sovereignty  had  roused 
no  patriotic  feeling  among  the  descendants  of  Vercingetorix ; 
the  Romans  themselves  might  ascribe  this  apathy  to  a sense 
of  the  solid  benefits  of  their  rule.  Such,  indeed,  is  the  ex- 
planation to  which  Tacitus,  feeling  evidently  that  an  explana- 
tion is  required,  himself  inclines : nevertheless  we  must 
remember  that  it  will  hardly  apply  to  the  circumstances  of 
the  earlier  period,  when  the  character  of  the  Roman  sway 
had  not  yet  made  itself  fully  felt.  We  must  bear  in  mind, 
however,  the  great  deficiency  in  ancient  society  of  the  means 
by  which  common  feeling  and  opinion  are  concentrated  and 
diffused  through  large  tracts  of  country,  and  among  wide- 
spread populations.  Tribes  and  races  were  then  more  sharp- 
ly separated  from  each  other  in  thought,  speech  and  usage ; 
the  centres  of  local  action  were  indefinitely  multiplied ; com- 
munication was  tedious  or  uncertain ; the  interchange  of 
commerce  was  irregular  and  slender ; the  continent  was  an 
archipelago  of  insulated  communities,  in  which  men  were 
separated  as  much  by  their  social  jealousies  as  by  the  natural 
impediments  to  union  and  combination.  It  was  only  by  the 
control  of  a powerful  aristocracy  that  these  clans  could  at 
any  time  be  moved  together.  From  the  period  of  their  con- 


A.  IT.  824.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


13 


, quest  it  had  been  the  policy  of  the  Romans  to  extinguish  the 
authority  of  the  chiefs  throughout  the  provinces,  and  to  set 
up  in  its  place  a multitude  of  local  democracies,  weak  in 
themselves,  full  of  domestic  jealousies  and  foreign  rivalries, 
suspicious  of  every  appeal  to  a common  sentiment,  looking 
with  petty  exclusiveness  to  their  own  special  interests,  and 
neglecting  more  and  more  even  the  imperfect  means  of  inter- 
communication which  they  possessed.  Perhaps  the  Romans, 
accustomed  themselves  to  the  contemplation  of  national  feel- 
ings and  common  motives  of  action,  exaggerated  the  na- 
tional character  of  the  resistance  made  to  their  arms  in  Gaul, 
Spain,  Britain  and  Germany.  It  was  not  the  mere  illusion 
of  vanity  that  induced  a Ccesar  or  a Tacitus  to  dignify  with 
the  name  of  a vast  nation  the  puny  efforts  of  a mere  clan  or 
robber’s  following.  At  all  events  we  may  be  sure  that  no 
common  bond  of  feeling  or  interest  existed  in  any  of  those 
great  provinces  at  the  end  of  the  first  century  of  the  em- 
pire.1 

Outside  the  bounds  of  Roman  dominion  there  was  still 
less  opportunity  for  concerted  action.  The  barbarians  be- 
yond the  Rhine  and  the  Danube,  on  the  shores  of  ^ 
the  Euxine  or  the  Caspian,  always  restless  and  foreign  aggres- 
generally  aggressive,  could  only  combine  under 
the  precarious  authority  of  some  leader  of  unusual  qualities 
or  fortune.  A Maroboduus  or  a Mithridates  might  have 
made  himself  formidable  to  Rome  at  the  crisis  of  the  late 
civil  commotions  : but  the  Germans  had  been  skilfully  divid- 
ed, the  Scythians  and  the  Dacians  had  not  yet  learnt  to 
combine ; a single  detachment  in  Moesia  was  sufficient  to 
strengthen  the  presidiary  legions,  and  assure  the  safety  of 
the  northern  frontier.  The  Parthians,  more  vigilant,  more 
politic,  more  united,  were  awed  by  their  recent  recollection 

! It  may  be  added  that  the  provinces  were  generally  disarmed.  Juvenal’s 
rhetorical  exclamation : “ spoliatis  arma  supersunt,”  is  hardly  true.  The  pro- 
prietors, moreover,  were  held  in  check  by  their  own  slaves.  The  Jews  could 
not  have  maintained  their  internecinal  war  against  Rome,  had  not  their  social 
system  been  very  different  in  this  respect  from  that  of  Gaul  or  Africa. 


14 


HISTORY  OF  TIIE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  71. 


of  Corbulo  ; and  they  too  had  their  own  troubles  at  this 
moment  to  contend  with.  The  arms  of  Yologesus  were  oc- 
cupied by  an  incursion  of  the  Alani,  who  were  pouring  east- 
ward from  the  mouth  of  the  Tanais,  and  thundering  against 
the  Caspian  gates.  Yologesus  had  proudly  offered  Yespa- 
sian  the  assistance  of  a force  of  Parthian  cavalry : hut  no 
sooner  was  the  imperator  seated  on  his  throne,  than  the 
Parthian  found  it  convenient  to  ask  for  assistance  in  his 
turn.  Yespasian,  who  had  haughtily  declined  foreign  aid  him- 
self, was  at  liberty  to  reject  his  rival’s  petition.1  He  had  no 
taste  for  enterprise  or  adventure : he  looked  forward  to  no 
distant  schemes  of  policy ; his  own  means  were  straitened, 
and  the  resources  of  the  empire  crippled.  He  had  just  inau- 
gurated an  era  of  peace,  and  the  tranquillity  of  the  state  was 
as  dear  to  him  as  his  own.  Perhaps  his  greatest  difficulty 
lay  in  resisting  the  solicitations  of  Domitian,  who  is  said  to 
have  aspired  to  lead  an  army  in  person,  and  to  have  impor- 
tuned his  father  for  the  means  of  reaping  laurels  for  himself 3 
The  joy  of  the  citizens  at  their  extraordinary  deliverance 
is  strongly  marked  in  the  scanty  records  of  the  time  which 
The  peace  of  have  descended  to  us.  The  Peace  of  Vespasian 
pSeTbyThe  was  celebrated  by  a new  bevy  of  poets  and  his- 
Komans.  torians  not  less  loudly  than  the  Peace  of  Augus- 
tus. A new  era  of  happiness  and  prosperity  was  not  less 
passionately  predicted.  Even  the  dry  prose  of  the  philoso- 
pher Pliny  bursts  into  luxuriance  at  the  sight  of  the  divine 
emperor  marching  with  his  sons  majestically  along  the  sacred 
path  of  virtue  and  beneficence , trodden  by  the  chiefs  of  Ro- 
man story .3  The  medals  of  the  period  were  stamped  with 


1 It  was  remarked  that  Yespasian  allowed  Yologesus  to  address  him  a 
letter,  with  the  superscription,  “ Arsaces,  king  of  kings,  to  Flavius  Vespasia- 
nus,  greeting:  ” and  even  used  the  same  terms  in  his  reply,  without  assuming 
himself  the  imperial  titles.  Dion,  Ixvi.  11. 

2 Suet.  Domit.  2.  Joseph.  Bell.  Jud.  vii.  7.  4.  Dion,  lxvi.  15.  This  inci- 
dent is  referred  to  the  year  u.  c.  828.,  a.  d.  75. 

8 Plin.  Hist.  Nat.  ii.  7. : “ Hac  proceres  iere  Romani ; hac  ccelesti  passu 
cum  liberis  suis  vadit  maximus  omnis  ®vi  rector  Vespasianus  Augustus,  fessis 
rebus  subveniens.”  Com.  Aurel.  Victor,  de  (Jaesar.  9. : “ Exsanguem  diu  fes* 


A.  U.  824.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


15 


repeated  allusions  to  this  consummation  of  the  emperor’s 
fortune,  a consummation  not  attained  by  unworthy  compli- 
ances, hut  dignified  by  the  restoration  of  domestic  freedom 
and  the  overthrow  of  every  foreign  enemy.1  This  was  the 
public  service  to  which  the  Flavian  dynasty  could  appeal, 
and  it  covered  defects  in  title  which  would  have  startled  the 
Romans  of  an  earlier  day.  The  family  of  the  divine  Julii, 
divine  in  birth,  in  beauty,  and  in  genius,  was  replaced  by  a 
brood  of  mere  plebeians,  adapted  neither  by  their  origin,  their 
history,  nor  their  personal  characteristics,  to  engage  the 
sympathies  of  a superstitious  and  imaginative  people.  The 
father,  the  first  of  his  name  who  had  risen  to  civil  honours, 
had  only  been  known,  while  yet  a subject,  as  the  plainest  of 
citizens,  thrifty  and  penurious  in  his  habits,  mean  in  his  ad- 
dress, homely  in  countenance  and  figure,  gifted  with  no  spark 
of  enthusiasm  or  genius,  a man  who  had  descended  from  the 
highest  office  to  exercise  a trade,  where  he  seemed  to  be  just 
in  his  proper  sphere ; and  in  accordance  with  this  character, 
after  his  accession  to  power  he  made  no  secret  of  his  con- 
tempt for  the  flatterers  who  pretended  to  discover  an  heroic 
origin  for  his  race.3  Of  the  sons,  the  elder,  though  rarely 
seen  in  the  city,  had  been  shunned  there  as  a dissolute  youth, 
of  foreign  manners  and  inclinations ; the  younger  was  only 
too  notorious  for  his  frivolity  and  debaucheries.  But  Vespa- 
sian and  Titus  had  deserved  well  of  the  republic  in  the  field ; 

eumque  terrarum  orbem  brevi  refecit ; ” and  Q.  Curtius,  x.  9.,  if  we  may  as- 
sign this  date  to  the  author  of  the  “ Life  of  Alexander.”  Those  who  believe 
that  the  Aratea  of  “ Germanicus  Csesar  ” is  the  work  of  Domitian,  will  also 
compare  v.  16.:  “Pax  tua,  tuque  adsis  nato  numenque  secundes.”  But,  for 
myself,  I adhere  to  the  opinion  I formerly  expressed,  that  the  “ Germanicu3 
C®sar  ” of  the  Codd.  is  the  nephew  of  Tiberius.  Imhof  shows,  among  other 
arguments,  that  Domitian  never  bears  this  title  among  his  contemporaries,  but 
rather  that  of  “ Germanicus  Augustus.”  Imhof,  Domilianm , p.  134. 

I Clinton,  Fast.  Bom.  i.  59.  Eckhel,  Bod.  Numm.  Veil.  vi.  323-330.  See 
the  legends:  “ Roma  resurges : ” “Pax  orbis  terrarum:”  “Paci  astern®  do- 
oms Yespasiani : ” “ Assertor  libertatis  public®  : ” “ Signis  receptis,”  &c. 

II  Suet.  Vesp.  12.:  “ Conantes  quosdam  originem  Flavi®  gentis  ad  condi- 
tores  Reatinos  comitemque  Eerculis  irrisit  ultro.” 


IG 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  71. 


they  had  saved  their  country  from  its  foes  : and  even  Domi- 
tian,  contemptible  as  he  was,  might  find  some  favour  with 
the  citizens  as  the  defender  of  the  Capitol  against  a new 
Gaulish  invasion,  as  a patriot  who  had  contended  for  the 
honour  of  the  national  deities,  and  waged  the  wars  of  Jove.1 

But  in  fact  the  regard  in  which  the  new  dynasty  was 
held,  rested  on  deeper  feelings  than  those  of  mere  personal 
admiration.  The  temper  of  the  Romans  had  undergone  a 
great  and  sudden  change.  The  voluptuous  luxury  of  the 
early  empire  had  reached  its  climax  under  Nero,  and  the  na- 
tion was  suffering  from  the  effects  of  its  indulgence.  It  was 
sick  at  heart,  debilitated  and  remorseful.  The  rash  attempt 
to  follow  their  sovereign  in  the  race  of  extravagance  had 
overwhelmed  the  fortunes  of  his  wealthiest  courtiers  ; his 
tyranny  had  crushed  the  most  powerful  nobles ; the  confla- 
gration of  the  city  had  destroyed  the  palaces  and  accumu- 
lated treasures  of  many  of  the  chief  families  ; disturbance  in 
the  provinces  had  dried  up  the  sources  of  opulence,  which 
had  been  wont  to  flow  with  unbroken  current  to  Rome  and 
Italy.  The  vulgar  magnificence  of  upstart  freedmen  had 
outraged  the  national  dignity,  and  put  prodigality  out  of 
fashion.  When  "V  espasian,  by  his  firmness  in  redressing  ex- 
tortion abroad,  and  his  vigilance  in  checking  peculation  at 
home,  enforced  the  moderation  recommended  by  his  own 
conspicuous  example,  he  found  his  subjects  well  inclined  to 
hail  the  new  era,  and  accept  with  satisfaction  the  restrictions 

1 Statius,  Sylv.  v.  3.  198. : 

“ Et  Senonum  furias  Latte  sumsere  cohortes.” 

And  Thebaid.  i.  21. : 

“ Aut  defensa  prius  vix  pubescentibus  annis 
Bella  Jovis.” 

The  defence  of  the  Capitol  was  likened  to  the  wars  of  Jupiter  and  the  Titans. 
At  a much  later  period  we  meet  with  an  allusion  to  paintings  on  this  subject  • 
on  the  walls  of  the  temple  : 

“ Juvat  infra  tecta  Tonantis 
Cernere  Tarpeia  pendentes  rape  Gigantas.” 

Claudian,  xxviii.  45. 


A.  U.  824.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


17 


he  might  place  on  display  and  expenditure.  Possibly,  in- 
deed, the  futility  of  sumptuary  enactments  had  been  discov- 
ered ; but  while  the  inquisitions  of  the  aediles  had  proved 
always  ineffectual,  the  turn  given  to  social  manners  by  the 
habits  of  the  court  seems  to  have  been  both  immediate  and 
lasting.  For  a hundred  years,  says  Tacitus,  from  the  battle 
of  Actium  to  the  reign  of  Galba,  the  refinements  of  the  table, 
the  coarsest  and  most  pervading  form  of  luxury  among  the 
Romans,  had  flourished  rankly  ; but  though  there  continued, 
no  doubt,  to  occur  many  instances  of  gross  and  profuse  liv- 
ing, the  period  of  the  worst  extravagance  now  passed  away, 
never  to  return  in  its  pristine  licentiousness.1  One  happy 
effect  of  the  late  bloody  conflicts  was  the  introduction  of 
many  new  men  from  provincial  families  into  the  magistracy 
and  senate,  and  these  offshoots  of  a ruder  stock  retained,  even 
with  their  enhanced  fortunes,  much  of  the  simplicity  of  theii 
ancient  manners.  We  may  remark  from  this  time  much 
greater  moderation  in  the  tone  of  Roman  literature,  and 
generally  more  decorum  of  thought  and  language,  than  in 
the  age  preceding.  The  people  seem  to  have  become  sud- 
denly sobered.  Their  most  cherished  delusions  had  been 
dispelled  by  suffering.  We  meet  with  little  now  of  the 
trrgid  declamation,  of  which  we  have  heard  so  much,  on  the 
grandeur  of  Rome,  the  immensity  of  her  conquests,  the  eter- 
nity of  her  dominion.  Henceforth  instead  of  flaunting  con- 
trasts between  the  fortune  of  the  empire  and  the  meanness 
of  all  foreign  nations,  we  shall  find  the  greater  happiness  and 
virtue  of  the  simple  barbarians  insinuated  or  even  asserted. 
Arms  are  no  longer  exalted  as  the  legitimate  career  of  the 
citizen.  Wealth  is  not  ostentatiously  worshipped  as  the 

1 Tac.  Ann.  iii.  55.:  “ Luxus  mens® panlatim  exolevere.”  Of 

the  existence  of  the  two  Apicii,  each  the  model  of  luxurious  living  in  his  own 
time  at  Rome,  there  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt.  The  first  lived  in  the  first 
century  before  Christ,  the  second  in  the  first  century  after.  It  is  to  the 
second  that  most  of  our  notices  refer.  The  third,  who  is  said  to  have  flour- 
ished in  the  reign  of  Trajan,  i.  e.  the  second  century  of  our  era,  is  only  known 
from  one  anecdote,  which  may  well  be  apocryphal,  of  Athenasus. 


18 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  71 


highest  object  of  desire.  Luxury,  and  the  vices  which  at- 
tend it,  are  denounced  as  sins,  not  merely  mocked  as  vulgar 
affectations.  Obedience  is  held  not  less  honourable  than 
command ; domestic  habits  and  virtues  are  regarded  with 
pleasure  and  esteem.  On  the  other  hand, — such  is  the  point 
at  which  the  highest  philosophy  has  arrived, — the  true  Di- 
vinity consists,  according  to  Pliny,  in  rendering  aid  as  a 
mortal  to  fellow  mortals.  This  is  recognized,  at  least  among 
the  most  intelligent,  as  the  actual  origin  of  mythological 
romance  ; and  such  as  this  is  the  godlike  career  of  the  august 
Yespasian,  the  greatest  of  all  rulers  in  every  age  and  realm, 
who  sustains  with  his  sons’  assistance  the  tottering  fabric  of 
society.  This  is  the  career  of  immortal  glory,  the  only  im- 
mortality, as  the  writer  plainly  intimates,  to  which  man  can 
hope  to  attain,  however  natural  and  pious  the  custom  of  as- 
cribing a divine  eternity  to  the  great  benefactors  of  their 
species.1  Even  the  court  poets  were  awed  to  measured  de- 
cency by  the  quiet  sentiment  of  the  nation.  The  panegyric 
of  Yespasian  by  Silius  Italicus,  the  ape  of  Virgil,  is  modelled 
upon  that  of  Augustus  Goesar , the  offspring  of  the  Gods  ; but 
it  hardly  yields  in  dignity  to  one  of  the  finest  passages  of 
the  LEneid  while  it  repudiates  its  most  vicious  audacities.2 

1 See  the  remarkable  passage  in  Pliny,  Hist.  Nat.  ii.  6.,  to  part  of  which  I 
have  already  referred.  “ Ileus  est  mortal!  juvare  mortalem,  et  hmc  ad  seter- 

nam  gloriam  via.  Hac  proceres  iere  Romani Hie  est  vetustissimus 

referendi  bene  merentibus  gratiam  mos,  ut  tales  numinibus  ascribant.  Quippe 
et  omnium  aliorum  nomina  deorum  .....  ex  hominum  nata  sunt  meritis.” 

2 Silius,  iii.  594. : 

“ Exin’  se  Curibus  virtus  cceleslis  ad  astra 
Efferet  .... 

Hinc  pater  ignotam  donabit  vincere  Thulen, 

Inque  Caledonios  primus  trahet  agmina  lucos ; 

Compescet  ripis  Rhenum,  reget  impiger  Afros, 

Falmiferamque  senex  bello  domitabit  Idumen ; 

Nec  Stygis  ille  lacus  viduataque  lumine  regna, 

Sed  Superum  sedes,  nostrosque  tenebit  honores.- 
I need  not  repeat,  for  the  classical  reader,  the  corresponding  encomium  on  Au 
gustus,  uHneicl.  vi.  793. : “Augustus  (Jaesar  Divurn  genus,”  fee. 


A.  U.  824.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


19 


Yet  if  we  turn  from  the  acts  and  merits  of  Vespasian  to 
the  lineaments  of  his  face  and  figure,  we  can  hardly  re- 
frain from  smiling  at  the  enthusiasm  avowed  perS0nai  ap- 
for  him.  None  of  the  Roman  emperors  had  a Eabiuof  Vcs- 
countenance  prosaic  as  his  ; nor  do  the  artists  Pasian- 
who  were  occupied  upon  it,  seem  to  have  imagined  that 
they  could  commend  themselves  to  their  patron  by  an 
attempt  to  embellish  or  idealize  it.  The  monuments  of 
Vespasian  represent  him  as  short  and  compact  in  figure, 
with  a thick  neck  and  broad  sensual  chin,  a round  bald 
head,  small  restless  eyes,  coarse  nose  and  lips,  a forehead 
deeply  wrinkled  with  fatigue  rather  than  with  thought, 
and  his  whole  expression  that  of  uneasiness  and  elfort.1  It 
may  be  worth  remarking,  as  a trait  of  manners,  that  the 
biographer,  in  noticing  the  robustness  of  his  health,  says 
that  he  took  no  further  care  of  it  than  to  rub  his  limbs  regu- 
larly after  bathing,  and  interpose  one  day’s  fast  in  the  course 
of  every  month.  His  ordinary  habit,  after  attaining  the 
sovereignty,  was  to  be  awakened  before  the  customary  hour, 
that  is,  before  dawn,  read  his  letters  and  despatches,  and 
then  admit  his  friends  to  his  levee.  He  slipped  his  feet  into 
sandals  without  assistance,  huddled  on  his  toga,  and  after 
transacting  business,  drove  out  and  returned  for  his  siesta.2 
His  repose  was  soothed  by  female  caresses ; but  after  the 
death  of  his  legitimate  consort  he  was  content  to  renew  the 
less  regular  union  he  had  previously  formed  with  a freed- 
woman  named  Coenis,  and  on  losing  her  also,  soon  after  his 
accession  to  power,  made  thenceforth  no  other  permanent 
connexion.3  From  the  midday  retirement  he  proceeded  to 

1 Suetonius  describes  him  with  a few  graphic  touches  : “ statura  fuit  quad 
rata,  compactis  firmisque  membris,  vultu  yeluti  nitentis.”  Vesp.  20. 

2 Suet.  Vesp.  21,  22. 

3 Coenis  was  a freedwoman  of  the  Claudian  family,  and  had  been  a fa- 
vourite of  Antonia,  the  mother  of  Claudius.  With  her  Yespasian  formed  the 
connexion  tolerated  by  Roman  law  under  the  name  of  contiiberrdum.  At  a 
later  period  he  made  a regular  marriage  with  a Roman  matron,  by  whom  he 
had  the  two  sons  who  succeeded  him.  On  her  decease  he  recalled  Ccenis  on 


20 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  71. 


the  bath,  and  thence  to  supper,  at  which  he  demeaned  him* 
self  with  the  affability  of  a man  conscious  of  having  dis 
charged  to  his  satisfaction  all  the  duties  of  the  day.  His 
conversation  was  sprightly,  and  he  allowed  his  companions 
almost  as  much  licence  in  raillery  as  he  assumed  for  himself ; 
but  his  humour  was  reputed  somewhat  low  by  the  polished 
wits  of  the  courts  of  Nero  and  Otho.  Some  of  his  coarse 
and  caustic  jests  are  recorded,  Avhich  might  serve  to  illus- 
trate the  manners  of  the  times,  were  they  fit  for  modern  ears. 
One  perhaps  may  be  repeated,  which  is  characteristic  of  the 
man,  and  has  attained  celebrity.  When  seized  with  his  last 
illness  and  feeling  the  near  approach  of  dissolution,  Ah!  he 
whispered  to  his  attendants,  methinlcs  J am  becoming  a 
God.1 

But  if  such  were  the  new  emperor’s  relaxations,  he  was 
thoroughly  in  earnest  in  matters  of  business.  He  took  a 

plain  soldier’s  view  of  his  duty,  without  looking 

A census,  and  L , 

other restora-  forward  as  a statesman ; but  m the  daily  work 

tivc  measures 

before  him  he  shrank  from  no  responsibility.  A 
Roman  who  understood  the  office  of  censor  was  always  in 
earnest.  It  involved  him  in  many  feuds  and  some  dangers. 
Tiberius  had  been  too  cynical ; Caius  too  reckless  ; N ero  too 

the  former  terms,  the  latv  not  admitting  of  union  by  confarreaiio  or  by  ms  et 
libra , in  such  a case.  Suet.  Vesp. : “ revoeavit  in  contubernium.”  Coenis  died 
in  824.  Dion,  lxvi.  14. 

1 Suet.  Vesp.  23.:  “Vte!  puto,  deus  fio.”  The  popular  opinion  of  Vespa- 
sian’s  amiable  qualities  is  preserved  in  the  romance  on  the  life  of  Apollonius 
by  Philostratus,  but  the  anecdote  there  recorded  of  him  can  hardly  be  ac- 
cepted as  history.  It  is  pretended  that  Vespasian,  conversing  with  the  phi- 
losopher in  Egypt,  for  whom  he  felt  the  highest  reverence,  and  whose  guidance 
he  solicited,  entreated  him  to  make  him  emperor : noiriadv  pe,  eipri,  [SaaiMa 
(v.  27.).  “ I have  already  done  so,”  replied  the  sage,  “ in  praying  the  Gods  to 

give  us  for  emperor  a just,  generous,  temperate,  old-fashioned  father  of  a fam- 
ily.” “0  Jupiter,”  returned  Vespasian,  “ may  I govern  wise  men,  and  may 
wise  men  govern  me  ! ” Then  turning  to  the  Egyptians,  he  said,  “ Draw  from 
me  as  from  the  Nile : ” (ap'voaod e d>c  Neiiov  napov).  If  he  really  said  any- 
thing like  this,  it  must  have  been  in  a moment  of  very  unusual  enthusiasm, 
it  is  possible,  indeed,  that  even  V espasian’s  insensibility  was  not  proof  against 
the  intoxication  of  flattery  attending  upon  a great  success. 


A.  U.  824.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


21 


self-indulgent  to  accept  an  invidious  responsibility  for  the 
sake  of  the  public  weal.  Augustus  had  assumed  it  from  pol- 
icy, Claudius  in  pedantry  fortified  by  insensibility,  but  to 
Vespasian  it  bore  the  form  of  an  act  of  military  discipline. 
The  disorders  of  the  times  had  thinned  the  ranks  of  the 
privileged  orders.  The  senate,  it  is  said,  had  been  reduced 
to  two  hundred  members.1 2  Both  senators  and  knights  had 
been  impoverished,  degraded  by  ignominious  compliances, 
blasted  by  popular  odium.  Illegitimate  pretenders  had 
stepped  into  the  places  left  vacant  by  death  and  ruin.  Ves- 
pasian set  about  the  revision  of  the  lists,  after  ancient  prece- 
dent, and  associated  his  son  Titus  with  himself  in  the  task. 
The  elder  seems  indeed  to  have  conducted  himself  with  more 
temper  than  the  younger  colleague ; for  it  was  against  the 
son  rather  than  the  father  that  the  murmurs  of  the  victims 
were  directed.  Vespasian’s  deference  to  the  senate  contin- 
ued after  his  demise  to  be  noted  as  the  great  merit  of  his  ad- 
ministration ; and  it  was  mentioned  to  his  honour  that  for 
many  years  he  refused  to  accept  the  tribunitian  power,  and 
the  title  of  Father  of  his  country.3  Nor  would  he  have  es- 
caped so  free  from  the  most  odious  charges  of  immorality, 
lavished  at  all  times  on  the  personal  enemies  of  the  order, 
had  he  rendered  himself  obnoxious  by  the  austerity  of  his 
censures.  But  Titus,  on  the  other  hand,  is  branded  with  the 
most  flagrant  imputations,  such  as,  having  circulated  at  first 
privately,  in  angry  and  indignant  circles,  were  too  often  ad 
mitted  without  proof,  but  without  hesitation,  among  the 

1 Such  is  supposed  to  be  the  meaning  of  Aurel.  Victor,  de  Ccesar.  9,  “ leo- 
tis  undique  optimis  viris  naiile  gentes  compositre,  cum  ducentas  segerrime  repo- 
risset.”  He  has  just  been  speaking  of  the  senate.  But,  as  there  were  several 
individual  families,  and  of  course  many  persons  of  one  family  in  the  same  gens 
or  house,  at  the  same  time  members  of  the  senate,  the  phrase  would  not  be  a 
correct  one.  Still  I can  hardly  suppose  that  the  author  means  us  to  under- 
stand that  the  whole  number  of  Roman  houses,  patrician  and  plebeian,  was 
reduced  to  200,  or  that  Vespasian  created  new  houses  to  such  an  extent. 

2 Suet.  Vesp.  12.  Even  during  the  civil  war  he  relinquished  the  imperial 
etiquette  of  causing  all  who  approached  him  to  be  searched  for  concealed 

weapons. 


22 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  71. 


records  of  history.  The  inquisition  now  made  into  the  char- 
acter, as  well  as  the  birth  and  means  of  the  Roman  nobles, 
furnished  no  doubt  an  opportunity  for  proscribing  many 
persons  against  whom  the  Flavian  dynasty  might  harbour 
ill-will.1  Titus,  we  are  told,  charged  with  the  defence  of  the 
new  settlement  of  power,  did  not  scruple,  in  one  instance  at 
least,  to  procure  the  assassination  of  an  enemy  to  his  family. 
He  invited  a hostile  senator,  the  Yitellian  general  Csecina,  to 
supper,  and  caused  him  to  be  waylaid  on  leaving  his  pres- 
ence, and  murdered.  The  proofs  of  the  victim’s  complicity 
in  a plot  were  said  indeed  to  be  notorious ; nevertheless  a 
rumour  prevailed,  and  was  accepted  by  many  as  true,  that 
his  real  offence  was  his  supposed  intimacy  with  Titus’s  fa- 
vourite Berenice.3 

To  prop  the  tottering  and  almost  prostrate  commonwealth, 
then  to  secure  and  adorn  it,  such  according  to  the  biographer 
The  financial  °f  the  Csesars  was  the  chief  care  of  Vespasian’s 
caiSpoifcy  of8’  principate.  Strict  discipline  must  be  restored  to 
Vespasian.  the  camp ; the  insolence  of  the  victors  must  be  re- 
pressed ; the  angry  restlessness  of  the  vanquished  must  be 
soothed.  Of  the  Vitellian  soldiers  the  greater  number  re- 
ceived their  discharge,  sweetened,  no  doubt,  by  adequate 
compensations ; while  to  those  who  had  shared  his  victory 
the  conqueror  extended  no  special  indulgence,  but  doled  out 
their  legitimate  remuneration  slowly  and  grudgingly.  The 
restriction  of  the  first  military  honours,  long  unworthily  lav- 
ished, to  the  greatest  military  services,  caused  perhaps  mur- 
murs which  have  left  their  echoes  in  the  record  of  our  history.’ 

1 Vespasian  assumed  the  censorship  u.  c.  825,  a.  d.  72:  “ intra  quadrien- 
nium,”  says  Pliny,  writing  his  Seventh  Book  (Nat.  Hist.  vii.  50). 

8 Suet.  Vesp.  8.,  Tit.  6.  Victor,  JEpit.  10.  The  Caocina  of  Suetonius  is 
the  AOienus  of  Dion,  lxvi.  16.,  whose  criminal  intentions  are  admitted  by  that 
writer.  Titus  is  accused  of  having  effected  the  destruction  of  other  suspected 
persons  by  sending  his  creatures  into  public  places  with  instructions  to  call 
loudly  for  their  punishment,  which  he  pretended  to  interpret  as  the  voice  and 
declared  will  of  the  people. 

8 Vespasian  restored  their  due  significance  to  the  triumphal  ornaments, 
such  as  the  tunica  palmata,  which  Tiberius,  Claudius,  and  Nero  had  prostituted 


A U.  824.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


23 


The  frugal  temper  and  actual  poverty  of  the  emperoi  were 
half-disguised  by  an  affected  simplicity  of  manners;  as  when 
he  rebuked  a perfumed  candidate  with  a gesture  of  disgust, 
and  the  sharp  remark,  I had  rather  you  had  smelt  of  garlic. 
The  censorship  offered  an  opportunity  for  a reconstitution  of 
the  provinces  and  free  states,  many  of  which  were  dealt  with 
according  to  their  political  deserts,  or  sacrificed  to  the  con- 
venience of  the  treasury.  The  gift  of  Latin  rights  to  the 
whole  of  Spain  was  a tribute  to  the  memory  of  Galba,  and  to 
the  support  his  enterprise  had  received  in  the  adhesion  of 
the  Iberians.1  This  favour  to  the  western  provinces  was 
balanced  by  severity  towards  other  portions  of  the  empire. 
Achaia,  to  which  Nero  had  precipitately  granted  freedom, 
was  again  reduced,  on  pretence  of  an  insurrection,  to  the  con- 
dition of  a taxable  province ; and  Lycia,  Rhodes,  Byzantium, 
and  Samos,  were  deprived  also  of  their  autonomy.2  The  de- 
pendent sovereignties  which  had  subsisted  up  this  time  in 
Thrace,  Cilicia,  and  Commagene,  were  finally  absorbed  into 
the  state,  and  enrolled  among  the  contributors  to  the  fiscus.3 
Whatever  pretext  might  be  assigned  for  these  harsh  measures, 
they  were  no  doubt  really  directed  by  financial  expediency. 
The  difficulties  of  the  imperial  government  were  in  fact  tre- 
mendous, and  the  charges  of  parsimony  or  avarice  which 
have  been  made  against  this  emperor,  must  be  considered  in 

to  men  of  inferior  claims  and  even  to  civilians.  See  Marquardt  (Becker's 
Handbuch  der  Alterih.  iii.  2.  453.). 

1 Plin.  Hist.  Hat.  iii.  4. 

2 Suet.  Vesp.  8.  14. ; Pausanias,  vii.  17.,  after  mentioning  Nero's  liberality 
to  Greece : ov  ppv  "EA/lyat  re  igeyevero  bvacdai  tov  S6pov  • Ovecnracnavov  yap 
uera  N epoiva  apgavToe,  £f  kpAvXiov  araaiv  wpoi/xBr/aav,  /cat  rsipag  vttoteXeis  re 
avBig  6 Oveorracnavbt;  elvai  <p6po>v , /cat  aKOveiv  in ihevaev  7/yep.6vog,  airopepa^ 
6 ltdvcu  ipi/cjag  Trp>  e^evdeptav  to  'B?i?l7/vik6v.  Comp.  Philostr.  Vit.  Apollon,  v. 
41.,  where  the  philosopher  is  said  to  have  expressed  his  indignation  to  the 
emperor’s  face, 

a Suet  1.  c.  Josephus,  Bell.  Jud.  vii.  7.  1.,  refers  the.  annexation  of  Com- 
magene to  the  year  a.  d.  72,  tj.  c.  825,  when  the  King  Antiochus  was  brought 
with  his  son  to  Rome.  Flaviopolis,  in  Cilicia,  commenced  its  era  with  the 
year  74. 


24 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  71. 


reference  to  his  necessities.1  The  Flavian  dynasty  succeeded 
to  the  inheritance  of  an  exhausted  population,  a rapacious 
soldiery,  and  an  empty  and  embarrassed  treasury.  The  Capi- 
tol was  not  yet  completed,  and  probably  large  debts  re- 
mained to  discharge  on  the  cost  of  its  reconstruction.  The 
losses  of  the  civil  wars  had  been  severe  and  various.  Italy 
had  been  devastated,  the  more  distant  provinces  had  been 
drained.  Whole  cities  awaited  the  restoring  hand  of  the  em- 
peror. Meanwhile  the  revenues  of  the  wealthiest  regions 
had  been  embezzled  by  the  prefects,  or  diverted  into  the 
camps.  Vespasian  not  only  suspended  the  dissipation  of  the 
finances  in  the  mad  luxury  of  the  imperial  court,  and  in  the 
construction  and  embellishment  of  the  imperial  palace ; he 
ordered  the  demolition  of  the  greater  part  at  least  of  N ero’s 
golden  house.  Nevertheless  there  were  other  heavy  expenses 
which  he  could  not  refuse  to  assume.2  The  Capitol  was  to 
be  rebuilt  with  a magnificence  suited  to  the  age ; the  temple 
of  Peace,  the  pledge  of  his  policy,  was  to  be  erected ; it  was 
essential  perhaps  to  the  stability  of  the  new  dynasty  to  ac- 
knowledge the  principle  of  deifying  deceased  emperors,  and 
the  shrine  of  Claudius,  vowed  to  him  by  Agrippina,  but 
swept  away  by  his  successor,  was  to  be  restored : at  the  same 
time  the  amusement  of  the  citizens  must  not  be  neglected; 
and  the  erection  of  a great  amphitheatre  for  the  national 
spectacles,  was  a prudent  indulgence  to  the  passions  of  the 
populace.  It  was  no  doubt  with  reference  to  the  manifold 
expenses  by  which  he  found  himself  beset,  the  arrears  of  the 
past,  and  the  anticipations  of  the  future,  of  which  but  a por- 

1 Tac.  Hist.  ii.  5. : “ prorsus,  si  avaritia  abesset,  antiquis  ducibus  par.” 

2 Among  the  incidental  cares  of  a prince  who  arrived  at  power  after  the 
disorders  of  civil  war,  may  be  mentioned  that  of  replacing  the  archives  of  the 
empire  which  had  been  lost  in  the  sack  of  the  Capitol.  The  most  important 
documents  of  Roman  history,  senatorial  decrees,  resolutions  of  the  people, 
treaties  of  peace  and- alliance,  engraven  on  brazen  tablets,  had  been  stored  up 
in  that  sacred  receptacle,  and  were  consumed  in  its  conflagration.  Yespasian 
caused  them  all  to  be  re-engraved  from  the  best  sources  within  reach,  and  tha 
collection  he  made  amounted  to  3000  pieces.  Suet.  Vesp.  8. 


A.  U.  824.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


25 


tion  has  here  heen  indicated,  that  Vespasian  is  said  to  have 
declared,  that  the  sum  of  forty  millions  of  sesterces  was  re- 
quired to  maintain  the  commonwealth.1 

The  inquisition  of  the  censorship,  extending  to  every  part 
of  the  empire,  was  directed  to  settling  the  finances  on  a solid 
basis,  and  the  arrangements  above  noticed  were  intended  to 
balance  the  public  revenues  and  expenditure.  Vespasian’s 
Besides  bringing  several  new  territories  within  ^t™stignla- 
the  sphere  of  direct  taxation,  Vespasian  revived  tlzed- 
various  imposts  which  Galba  in  the  first  fervour  of  his  tri- 
umph had  abolished,  and  also  added  new  ones.  He  enhanced 
the  tributes  of  all  the  provinces,  and,  in  some  cases,  even 
doubled  them.3  The  Roman  writers  on  land  have  left  us 
some  curious  notices,  showing  how  minute  and  searching  was 
the  assessment  now  made ; and  they  add,  that  the  measures 
for  raising  revenue  on  the  strips  of  public  domain  still  unas- 
signed in  Italy,  but  illegitimately  occupied,  caused  commo- 
tions which  could  only  be  appeased  by  desisting  from  the 
attempt.3  Many  trivial  particulars  of  the  Flavian  finance 
are  added  by  the  historian,  who  could  often  see  in  the  reason- 

1 Suet.  Vesp.  16. : “ Summa  eerarii  fiscique  iuopia,  de  qua  testificatus  sit 
initio  statim  principatus,  professus  quadringenties  millies  opus  esse  ut  respub- 
lica  stare  posset.”  This  sum  of  40,000  millions  of  sesterces,  or  320  millions 
sterling,  has  been  supposed  by  some  writers  to  represent  the  annual  revenue  or 
expenditure  of  the  state.  Others,  startled  at  the  extravagance  of  this  explana 
tion,  have  proposed  to  alter  quadringenties  into  quadragies ; i.  e.  400  millions, 
or  32  millions  sterling.  So  violent  a remedy  is  inadmissible;  nor  need  we 
suppose  that  the  sum  represents  the  annual  revenue  of  the  state,  which  never 
probably  came  under  one  head  at  all.  See  the  remarks  made  in  chapter  xxxii. 
of  this  work.  Some  of  the  wide  conjectures  which  have  been  advanced,  as  to 
the  amount  of  the  imperial  revenues,  are  collected  in  a note  by  Marquardt 
(Becker’s  Handbuch,  iii.  2.  213.).  Dureau  de  la  Malle’s  solution  corresponds 
with  that  I have  proposed  in  the  text.  See  Econ.  Pol.  des  Domains , ii. 
465.  435. 

Suet.  Vesp.  16. 

3 Frontinus,  de  Colon,  ed.  Gees.  p.  146.  Aggenus,  de  Controv.  Agrorum : 
Hyginus,  de  Gener.  Conirov.  in  Script.  Pei  Agrar.  ed.  Laehmann,  pp.  81.  133. 
See  Dureau  de  la  Malle,  ii.  436.  Laboulaye,  Droit  fonciere , 71.  Marquardt 
(Becker’s  Handb.,  iii.  1.  339.). 

117 


26 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  71. 


able  policy  of  the  most  honest  of  the  Caesars  nothing  hut  the 
petty  parsimony  of  a sordid  mind.  Vespasian  is  accused  of 
making-  small  gains  by  speculations ; of  selling  offices  to  can- 
didates and  pardons  to  criminals ; of  advancing  the  most 
rapacious  prefects  to  the  most  opulent  prefectures,  that  they 
might  have  more  to  disgorge  when  it  suited  him  to  condemn 
them  for  extortion ; finally,  of  inventing  new  and  etmn  dis* 
gusting  objects  of  taxation,  and  defending  himself,  according 
to  the  well-known  anecdote,  by  remarking  that  the  coin 
smelt  not  less  sweet  from  them.1  Nevertheless,  Suetonius 
himself  bears  witness  to  many  instances  of  this  prince’s  lib- 
erality towards  all  classes  of  men  / to  impoverished  senators 
and  consulars,  to  afflicted  communities,  and  generally  to  the 
professors  of  the  arts  and  sciences.  It  was  remarked,  as  an 
instance  of  his  consideration  for  deserving  industry,  that  he 
rejected  a proposal  to  move  the  materials  for  his  buildings  by 
improved  machinery,  declaring  that  he  must  be  suffered  to 
feed  liis  people? 

The  foundation  of  colonies  had  been,  heretofore,  the  or- 
dinary mode  of  paying  olf  the  discharged  veterans  of  the  civil 
Foundation  of  war s,  and  though  Vespasian  does  not  seem  to 
colonies.  have  made  any  new  establishments  of  this  kind, 
the  number  of  older  colonies  he  reconstituted  shows  that  he 
followed  the  policy  of  his  predecessors  in  relieving,  by  these 
means,  his  over-burdened  finances.  Ostia,  at  the  mouth  of 
the  Tiber,  Nola  and  Puteoli  in  the  wealthiest  region  of  Cam- 
pania, Forum  Populi,  Reate,  and  other  places  in  the  districts 
round  the  capital,  were  thus  recruited  with  a new  stock ; 
nor  need  we  suppose  that,  as  in  the  assignments  of  Octavius, 
the  actual  inhabitants  were  dispossessed  for  it.  This  is,  per- 
haps, the  first  historical  fact  that  confirms  what  the  poets  had 
already  indicated,  the  decrease  of  population  even  in  the  heart 
of  Italy.3  But  the  censors  must  have  revealed  the  token  of 

1 Suet.  L c.  Dion,  Ixvi.  14. 

2 Suet.  Vespas.  18.:  “ jrsefatus,  sineret  se  plebeculam  pascere.” 

8 Nero,  indeed,  had  in  the  same  manner  restored  Antium  and  Tarentum. 
Tac.  Ann.  xiv.  27. 


A.  U.  824.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


27 


this  ominous  movement  to  the  emperor,  and  thrown  a gloom 
over  his  prudent  efforts  to  restore  the  finances.1 

The  colonist  sheathed  his  sword  when  he  put  his  hand  tc 
the  plough,  and  the  establishment  of  colonies  was  understood 
as  a pledge  of  the  restoration  of  peace.  Among 

x 0 New  forum  aua 

the  architectural  works  with  which  Vespasian  temple  of 

x , Peace. 

now  decorated  the  city,  one  of  the  most  promi- 
nent was  the  forum  with  which  he  extended  the  line  of  clois- 
tered areas  thrown  open  by  Julius  and  Augustus.  The  great 
fire  had  cleared  a site  for  these  new  constructions  at  the  back 
of  the  Roman  forum.  As  the  works  of  his  great  predeces- 
sors had  been  illustrated  by  the  shrines  of  Yenus  and  Mars,  so 
the  colonnades  of  Vespasian  were  arranged  to  embrace  the 
new  temple  of  Peace,  a bold  personification  of  the  aspirations 
of  the  age,  unknown  to  the  Grecian  Olympus.  This  temple, 
which  seems  to  have  been  of  unusual  size  and  splendour,  was 
embellished  with  the  spoils  of  the  J ewish  war,  and  works  of 
art  from  other  countries  of  the  East.2  He  completed  the  de- 
sign with  a basilica,  in  which  he  invited  the  learned  of  all 
professions  to  meet,  and  conduct  their  tranquil  discussions.3 

1 Several  places  in  tlie  provinces  may  be  added  to  the  list  of  Vespasian’s 
colonies ; Aventicum  in  Gaul,  Flaviobriga  in  Spain,  Develtus,  Siscia  and  Flavi- 
opolis  in  Thrace,  Caesarea  in  Samaria,  and  another  Elaviopolis,  already  men- 
tioned, in  Cilicia.  Comp.  Plin.  Hist.  Nat.  iv.  18.  31.  34.,  and  inscriptions. 
Tyre,  Paphos,  Salamis,  and  other  places  in  the  East,  seem  to  have  received 
favours  from  Vespasian  or  Titus,  which  they  acknowledged  by  commemorat- 
ing the  auspicious  year,  stoq  veov  lepov , on  their  coins.  Of  Tyre,  Q.  Curtius, 
whose  work  has  been  generally  assigned  to  this  period,  says  (iv.  4.) : “ multis 
ergo  casibus  defuncta,  et  post  excidium  renata,  nunc  tamen  longa  pace  cuncta 
refovente,  sub  tutela  Roman®  mansuetudinis  acquiescit.”  But  from  the  same 
passage  Niebuhr  argues  that  the  writer  lived  in  the  time  of  Severus.  Comp. 
Herodian,  iii.  9.  10.  Ulpian,  in  the  Digest , 1.  15.  1. 

2 Joseph.  Bell.  Jud.  vii.  5.  7.  Plin.  Hist.  Nat.  xxxv.  36,  xxxvi.  24.  Hero- 
dian, i.  44.  A picture  of  the  battle  of  Issus,  by  an  artist  of  Alexandria,  was 
removed  by  Vespasian  and  suspended  in  the  temple  of  Peace.  Ptolemaeus 
apud  Phot.  (Sharpe’s  Hist,  of  Hgypt,  i.  307.).  Here  also  were  placed  several 
works  of  art  which  Nero  had  seized  in  the  provinces  for  the  decoration  of  Iris 
Golden  House.  Plin.  H.  N.  xxxiv.  19.  24. 

3 Gellius,  v.  21.,  xvi.  8.  Galen,  de  Comp.  Medic,  i.  See  Reimar’s  note  or 


28 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMAVS 


[A.  D.  71. 


Augustus  had  endowed  the  literature  of  his  time  with  the 
collection  of  the  Palatine  library.  V espasian  not  only  found- 
ed a library  in  his  forum,  but  was  the  first  of  the  Roman 
sovereigns  to  institute  a salaried  hierarchy  of  teachers.  Au- 
Vespasian’s  gustus  in  a simpler  and  more  generous  age  had 
me°ntofnnt°-flr"  stimulated  genius  by  personal  condescension: 
crature.  but  the  Flavian  era  could  not  appreciate  the 

delicacy  of  the  Augustan,  and  Vespasian  could  find  no 
happier  means  of  patronizing  letters  than  by  handsome 
wages  paid  quarterly.  Destitute  himself  of  learning  and 
polite  accomplishments,  he  cannot  have  been  instigated 
to  this  indulgence  by  any  just  appreciation  of  the  claims  of 
literary  merit.1  Nevertheless,  the  measure  he  adopted  was 
systematic,  munificent,  and  permanent.  Not  only  did  he 
confer  presents  or  pensions  upon  poets  and  artists,  but  to  the 
rhetoricians  and  grammarians,  both  Greek  and  Latin,  in  the 
provinces  as  well  as  in  the  city,  he  assigned  an  annual  pay- 
ment, varying  in  regular  gradations,  but  amounting  ordi- 
narily to  a liberal  stipend,  in  addition  to  their  pupils’  fees.3 
For  such  extensive  liberality,  so  new  to  the  policy  of  Rome, 
there  must  have  been  a strong  public  motive.  Amidst  all 
the  brilliancy  of  the  late  reigns,  the  solid  education  of  the 

Dion,  Ixvi.  15.  Upon  the  locality  of  this  temple  the  topographers  are  now 
agreed.  For  a long  time  the  great  ruins  which  bear  the  name  of  Constantine 
were  mistaken  for  it. 

1 Aurelius  Victor  notices  as  an  important  fact,  that  hitherto  all  the  empe- 
rors from  Augustus,  and  particularly  the  five  who  were  of  Cassarean  blood,  were 
men  of  literary  accomplishments  : Epit.  8.  “ adeo  literis  culti  atque  eloquentia 
fuere  ut,  ni  cunetis  vitiis,  absque  Augusto,  nimii  forent,  profecto  texissent 
modica  fiagitia.” 

2 Suet.  Vesp.  18.:  “ingenia  et  artes  vel  maximefovit:  primus  e fisco  La- 
tinis  Gracisque  rhetoribus  annua  centena  (80(V.)  constituit.”  See  farther 
Schmidt,  “ Dank-  und  Glaiibensfreiheit  im  1 sten  Jahrlmndcrt ,”  p.  440  foil.  The 
rhetoricians  included  the  sophists  or  philosophers.  Vespasian  extended  hia 
liberality  occasionally  to  poets  and  artists : “ prcestantissimos  poetas,  neenon 
et  artifices,  Com  Veneris,  item  Colossi  refectorem,  insigni  congiario  donavit.” 
He  made  a present  of  500,000  sesterces  (4000A)  to  Saleius  Bassus,  the  “ tenuis 
Saleius  ” of  Juvenal.  Tacitus  Dial,  de  Oral.  9.,  who  calls  this  liberality  “ mira 
et  eximia” 


A.  U.  824.1 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


29 


upper  ranks,  in  the  alarm  or  reckless  profusion  of  the  times, 
had  been  grievously  neglected,  and  the  encouragement  given 
by  Nero  to  trivial  accomplishments  had  weakened  the  foun- 
dation of  the  Roman  character.  The  new  system  may  be  in- 
terpreted as  an  attempt  to  restore  the  tone  of  society,  to 
infuse  into  the  national  mind  healthier  sentiments  and  aspira- 
tions, in  harmony  with  its  sobered  view  of  material  enjoyments. 
At  the  same  time  the  emperor  was  not  blind  to  the  importance 
of  attaching  the  Roman  youth  to  his  government,  and  gain- 
ing the  direction  of  their  thoughts.  Hence,  perhaps,  the 
jealousy  and  aversion  with  which  the  new  mode  of  public  in- 
struction was  regarded  by  such  a writer  as  Tacitus,  the 
depositary  of  pre-imperial  traditions.  It  was  not  the  publi- 
city of  education  itself,  but  the  influence  assumed  over  it  by 
the  government,  that  really  excited  the  odium  of  the  old 
aristocracy.  They  felt,  too,  that  the  professors,  the  men  of 
phrases  and  arguments,  would  soon  work  their  way  into  the 
place  of  governors  and  magistrates,  and  supplant  the  proud 
but  indolent  magnates  in  their  immemorial  privileges.  The 
rhetorician  might  be  raised  to  the  consul’s  seat  or  the  consul 
might  descend  to  the  rhetorician’s : either  alternative  was 
equally  distasteful  to  the  adherents  of  antique  prejudice  and 
custom.  Quintilian,  the  teacher  of  youth  and  private  tutor  in 
the  palace,  was  perhaps  the  first  pedagogue  that  obtained 
the  consular  ornaments;  but  his  class  retained  to  the  last 
the  advantages  they  now  acquired,  and  continued  to  scale 
the  heights  of  office  from  the  modest  but  convenient  elevation 
of  the  professor’s  chair.  Moreover  the  grammarians  were 
x’or  the  most  part  philosophers,  and  the  teachers  of  wisdom 
and  morality,  the  avowed  critics  of  political  authority,  were 
soothed  by  the  same  measures  which  converted  the  profess- 
ors of  literature  into  instruments  of  government.  A lasting 
alliance  was  effected  between  the  preachers  of  ethics  and  the 
guardians  of  the  public  peace,  the  absence  of  which  had 
caused  many  collisions  in  the  reigns  of  earlier  emperors.  At 
Rome,  at  Athens,  at  Antioch,  and  other  centres  of  intellectual 
activity,  ideas  were  generally  enlisted  on  the  side  of  govern- 


80 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  71. 


ment.  The  experiment  of  the  Greek  sovereigns  of  Egypt 
was  applied  with  like  results  throughout  the  empire.  At 
Alexandria  Vespasian  had  observed  and  meditated  on  the 
policy  of  the  Ptolemies : he  appreciated  the  caresses  and  flat- 
teries he  there  received  from  grammarians  and  sophists ; and 
possibly  the  consciousness  of  his  own  deficiency  in  the  learn- 
ing of  the  schools  enhanced  his  notion  of  its  political  im- 
portance. 

The  alliance,  I have  said,  was  durable,  but  its  effect  was 
not  immediately  complete.  Philosophy,  during  the  last  cen- 
Measures  of  tury,  had  been  a school  of  political  opposition  ; 
aSnst'the  and  though  the  common  voice  of  the  unlettered 
philosophers.  populace  hailed  the  Flavian  empire  as  a blessing, 
the  men  of  ideas  and  theories  refused,  at  least  for  one  gene- 
ration, to  descend  from  the  heights  of  their  impracticable 
dogmatism,  and  acknowledge  the  sovereignty  of  a mild  auto- 
crat as  the  sole  refuge  from  anarchy  and  barbarism.  The 
temple  of  Peace  was  consecrated  in  the  year  828  ; but  the 
alliance  it  Avas  intended  to  cement  between  the  prince  and 
the  philosophers  was  quickly  broken  by  intrigues  against  the 
chief  of  the  state,  which  could  be  too  surely  traced  to  men 
of  character  and  influence.  Curiatius  Maternus,  a distin- 
guished orator,  the  favourite  of  the  old  aristocracy,  excited 
the  jealousy  of  Vespasian’s  government,  mild  and  liberal 
though  it  professed  itself,  by  the  freedom  of  his  tragedies  on 
Roman  subjects,  in  which  he  painted  the  fall  ofliberty.  In 
a later  reign  this  eccentricity  seems  to  have  proved  fatal  to 
him.1  Hel vidius  Priscus,  a man  of  higher  fame,  whose  in- 
temperate opposition  has  already  been  noticed,  continued  to 
murmur  at  the  conduct  of  affairs  ; but  in  the  absence  of  de- 
tails Ave  can  only  acquiesce  in  Dion’s  judgment  on  his  princi- 
ples. He  indulged  in  vain  and  aimless  allusions  to  liberty 


1 Maternus  is  one  of  the  principal  characters  in  the  dialogue  da  Oraloribiis, 
ascribed  to  Tacitus.  See  capp.  2.  3.  11.  13.  Besides  a Medea  and  a Tliyeslcs, 
he  wrote  a Domilius  and  a Cato.  Some  critics  hold  him  to  be  the  an  thor  of 
the  Octavia  which  goes  under  the  name  of  Seneca.  He  is  supposed  to  be  tha 
Maternus  put  to  death  by  Domitian:  Dion,  lxA'ii.  12. 


A.  U.  824.  J 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


31 


and  the  free  state,  shades  of  the  past  to  which  no  public  man 
pretended  to  give  a substance,  fancying  that  on  him  had  de- 
scended the  mantle  of  his  father-in-law,  the  reserved  and 
prudent  Thrasea,  who,  on  the  contrary,  while  he  withdrew 
from  political  life  under  the  tyranny  of  Nero,  professed  no 
violent  opposition,  nor  would  ever  have  balanced  a visionary 
republic  against  the  wise  and  legitimate  prineipate  of  Ves- 
pasian.1 It  is  the  penalty  of  power  that  inferior  minds  can- 
not discriminate  between  tyranny  and  just  authority,  and  are 
more  likely  to  revolt  against  an  indulgent  prince  than  an  un- 
scrupulous despot.  Helvidius  indeed  was  exasperated  against 
the  emperor  by  a private  grudge,  and  the  penalty  he  at  last 
paid  was  due  to  his  perverse  malignity.  Vespasian  long 
bore  with  this  unprincipled  opposition,  which  distressed  and 
mortified  him.  He  knew  himself  to  be  the  object  of  many 
conspiracies,  encouraged  if  not  actually  fostered  by  the  mur- 
murs of  such  orators  as  Helvidius.  He  was  engaged  on  a 
great  experiment  in  maintaining  just  and  equitable  govern- 
ment. The  threat  he  once  pronounced  after  listening  to  a 
petulant  harangue,  Either  my  son  shall  succeed  me  or  I will 
have  no  successor , implying  that  if  his  dynasty  was  rejected, 
the  state  would  be  left  without  a chief  at  all,  was  received 
with  a shudder  by  thousands  who  felt  that  the  empire  was  a 
state  necessity.2  It  was  to  protect  the  state  no 
less  than  himself  that  he  procured  a decree  for  death  of  He] 
Helvidius’s  exile,  and  followed  it  with  an  order 

1 Such  at  least  was  the  conduct  of  Thrasea  as  depicted  by  Tacitus.  Dion 
obscures  at  first  the  real  difference  between  the  two  : 'E Jwv'diog  . . . rfpv  rov 
Qpaaeov  -irappr/aiav  oil  cvv  naipcf  pipovpevog : though  in  the  fragment  which 
seems  to  be  rightly  appended  to  this  chapter,  he  plainly  contradicts  himself, 
adding : f/v  yap  tov  Boa.- tov  yapfipog  leal  ty/hovv  aiirov  eir/iArrero'  tvoav  <T 
aiirov  rj pap  rave.  0 paaiag  /lev  yap  i~l  NT ipuvog  bv  ovk  7/ptmcero  aiiro,  kcH 

oiidsv  pkvrot  oils’  tig  v^piariKov  i~Mytv  kg  aiirov,  ovds  i~ par  rev  . ovrog 

Sk  OveairaGiavu  rj^pero,  nal  ovr ’ idig  oiire  kv  r<f  koiviS  aiirov  aneixero.  Dion, 
Ixvi.  15.  Comp.  Suet.  Vesp.  15. 

2 Dion,  1.  c. : k/ie  phi  viog  SiaSegerai  f)  ovddg  aXKog.  It  is  possible,  how- 
ever, that  the  expression  should  be  differently  interpreted.  Comp.  Victor, 
Cces.  9. : “ Simul  divinis  deditus,  quorum  vera  plerisque  negotiis  compererat, 
mccessores  fidebai  liberos  Titum  ac  Domitianum  fore.” 


32 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  ..  71. 


for  his  death.  This  last  command  it  seems  he  either  did  not 
mean  to  be  executed,  or  at  least  speedily  repented  of,  and 
would  have  withdrawn ; but  officious  courtiers  interposed  to 
assure  him  that  it  was  too  late,  and  the  victim  had  already 
suffered.1  Helvidius  was  the  only  martyr  the  philosophers 
could  claim.  In  no  other  case  did  the  punishment  of  their 
agitation  go  farther  than  banishment.  It  was  however  with 
the  full  concurrence  of  public  feeling  that  the  emperor  re- 
solved to  sweep  from  the  city  the  whole  sect  of  the  Stoics 
and  Cynics.  Under  the  tyranny  of  Nero  these  men  had 
been  silent,  even  if  they  had  not  joined  in  the  general  chorus 
of  adulation ; but  the  indulgence  of  a milder  system  warmed 
them  till  they  hissed  and  stung.2  Vespasian  took  counsel 
with  his  old  adviser  Mucianus,  who  held  the  offenders  in 
equal  contempt  with  himself.  It  was  determined  to  revive, 
for  the  immediate  safety  of  the  state,  the  obsolete  enactments 
of  the  republic,  which  had  prosecuted  the  philosophers  for 
the  remotest  tendencies  ascribed  to  their  teaching.  All  pro- 
fessors of  the  obnoxious  dogmas  were  required  to 

Banishment  of  . TT 

the  stoics  and  leave  the  city ; two  of  the  most  noted,  liostilms 

r vnjcs 

and  the  Cynic  Demetrius,  were  deported  to 
islands.  Secure  of  their  lives,  both  these  men  persisted  to 
ihe  last  in  virulent  invectives  against  the  government.  But 
Vespasian’s  temper  was  proof  against  this  provocation.  I 
will  not  hill , he  said,  a dog  that  larks  at  me.3  A special 

1 The  precise  act  which  gave  occasion  to  this  order  is  not  mentioned,  nor 
in  what  judicial  form  it  was  given.  Dion : nal  iro/ Ud  npaTTcrv  epelte  nore 
diKjjv  avT&v  Stice.LV.  Suet.:  “relegatum  primo,  deinde  et  interfici  jussum.” 
Comp.  Plin.  Ep.  iii.  11.  Tac.  Agric.  45. : “nostrse  duxere  Helvidium  in  car 
cei'em  manus.” 

2 The  character  of  this  opposition  is  shown  in  the  anecdotes  mentioned  by 
Epictetus,  Dissert,  i.  1.  2.  The  Scholiast  on  Juvenal,  iv.  53.,  gives  an  account 
of  a certain  Palfurius,  which  shows  how  philosophy,  especially  that  of  the 
Porch,  was  the  refuge  of  the  discontented  personages  whom  the  emperors  had 
degraded  for  their  vices.  The  repeated  sneers  of  Juvenal  at  the  Stoics  and 
Cynics  betray  the  popular  feeling  regarding  them  at  the  beginning  of  the  second 
century. 

3 Dion,  lxvi.  13.  Suet.  Ycsp.  15. 


A.  U.  824.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


33 


grace  was  accorded  to  Musonius  Rufus,  who  seems  to  have 
been  honest  and  temperate.  He  was  excepted  by  name 
from  the  common  proscription.  Whatever  might  be  his 
political  theories,  he  knew  that  the  free  state  was  impossible, 
and  refrained  from  flattering  the  illusions  of  a frivolous 
fanaticism.1 

Hero’s  golden  house  had  risen  like  an  exhalation,  and  like 
an  exhalation  it  disappeared.  The  masses  of  building  that 
projected  forward  from  the  Palatine,  and  con- 

r J . . ’ . Demolition  of 

nected  the  mansions  of  the  earlier  Ccesars  with  Nero’s  golden 
the  Esquiline  and  the  Cselian,  were  entirely  swept 
away.2  The  colossus  alone,  which  had  stood  in  the  entrance 
of  the  palace  from  the  V elia,  was  allowed  to  remain  erect ; 
it  is  not  quite  certain,  however,  whether  it  was  removed 
from  its  place  at  this  period.  The  head  indeed  of  Hero  was 
stricken  off1,  and  that  of  Titus  substituted  for  it.  The  con- 
trast might  have  provoked  a smile,  had  the  homely  features 
of  the  elder  Flavius  replaced  the  divine  beauty  of  the  Ro- 
man Apollo.  On  the  ridge  of  the  Velia,  at  the  summit  of 
the  Sacred  Way,  were  laid  the  foundations  of  a triumphal 
arch,  which  was  completed  in  the  next  reign,  to  commemo- 
rate the  conquest  of  Judea.  The  palatial  buildings,  com- 
menced by  Hero,  on  the  Esquiline,  after  being  occupied  for 
a time  by  Titus,  were  demolished,  or  converted  Erecti0D  of 
by  a rapid  but  complete  transformation,  into  baths  by  Titus, 
public  baths.  Our  antiquaries  can  even  now  trace  in  the 
manner  of  their  construction  the  precipitation  with  which 
the  change  was  effected ; the  chambers  of  the  thermae  being 
erected  on  the  basement  of  the  previous  edifice,  which  still 

1 When  even  Thrasea  had  peevishly  exclaimed,  “ I had  rather  be  killed  to- 
day than  banished  to-morrow,”  Musonius  reproved  him  in  the  best  spirit  of  the 
Stoics.  “ Should  you  not  rather  try  to  acquiesce  in  whatever  lot  befalls  you  ? ” 
Epictet.  Dissert,  i.  1. 

s Orosius,  indeed,  mentions  fne  burning  of  the  golden  house  among  the 
disasters  of  Trajan’s  reign.  I can  hardly  doubt  that  he  is  in  error.  The  im 
perial  residence  was  henceforth  limited  to  the  Palatine. 


34 


HISTORY  01’  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  71. 


presents  a remnant  of  Nero’s  original  work.1 2  The  character 
of  the  great  thermae  of  the  empire  has  already  been  described 
under  the  principate  of  Augustus ; hut  the  bath-life  of  the 
Romans  had  not  then  received  its  full  development.  Agrippa 
had  accommodated  the  citizens  by  the  erection  of  a multi- 
tude of  baths  in  their  streets  ; but  these  were  diminutive  in 
size  and  limited  in  their  appliances.  The  same  great  bene- 
factor had,  however,  constructed  public  baths  in  the  Campus 
on  a grander  scale,  adorned  with  halls  and  porticos,  and  the 
Pantheon  itself  may  have  been  meant  for  a vestibule  to  a 
mass  of  buildings  of  proportionate  grandeur.  In  the  absence 
of  any  corroborative  statement,  we  shall  hardly  assign  such 
magnificence  to  the  baths  of  Agrippa.  They  seem,  however, 
to  have  been  amplified  and  improved  by  Nero,  by  whose 
name  they  were  afterwards  known,  and  whether  they  escaped 
the  great  fires  of  their  region,  or  were  restored  after  confla- 
gration, they  lasted  through  the  empire,  and  survived,  in- 
deed, the  still  grander  creations  of  later  builders.3  There 
can  be  little  doubt,  however,  that  they  were  far  outshone  in 
size,  in  convenience,  and  in  decoration  by  the  baths  of  Titus, 
which  were  again  surpassed  by  those  of  Caracalla,  Diocle- 
tian, and  Constantine.  The  erection  of  these  palaces  of  the 
people  marks  an  era  in  our  history.  It  indicates  the  necessi- 
ty which  the  government  began  to  feel  of  strengthening  its 
intrinsic  weakness  by  pampering  an  indolent  but  restless 
multitude.  The  monuments  of  the  Flavian  and  Antonine 
age  show  how  much  the  emperors  now  leant  upon  their 
favour  with  the  mass  of  the  citizens,  and  how  great  were 

1 Suet.  Tit.  7. : “ Thermis  celeriter  exstructis.”  Martial,  de  Spectac.  2., 
indicates  that  the  baths  were  erected  on  the  site  of  Nero’s  palace  or  gardens  • 

“ Hie  ubi  miramur  velocia  munera  thermas, 

Abstulerat  miseris  tecta  superbus  ager.” 

2 The  Thermse  Neronianse  are  mentioned  as  in  use  by  Sidonius  Apollinaris 
( Carm . xxiii.  495.).  The  Aqua  Virgo,  which  fed  them,  brought  into  the  city 
over  the  Pincian  hill  by  Agrippa,  continues  still  to  convey  water  to  Rome.  The 

other  aqueducts  which  supplied  the  baths  of  the  tater  emperors,  had  been  cut 
off,  or  had  fallen  into  disrepair,  in  the  course  of  the  fifth  century. 


A.  U.  824.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


35 


tlie  sacrifices  they  made  to  content  and  amuse  them.  The 
Thermae  of  Titus  comprised  every  convenience  The  baths  of 
and  every  luxury  for  the  residence  hy  day  of  the  Titus- 
great  potentate,  the  mob  of  Rome.  The  provision  of  hot  and 
cold  water,  of  tanks  and  fountains,  for  washing,  for  bathing, 
and  for  steaming,  was  a part  only  of  the  luxurious  appliances 
with  which  they  were  furnished.  Partly  under  cover,  and 
partly  open  to  the  air,  they  offered  chambers  or  terraces  for 
every  enjoyment  and  every  recreation.  Presented  to  the 
populace  without  charge,  for  even  the  payment  of  the  small- 
est copper  coin  which  had  been  required  under  the  republic 
was  remitted  under  the  empire,  no  tax  whatever  was  put  on 
the  full  enjoyment  of  their  attractions.  The  private  lodging 
of  Caius  or  Titus  might  be  a single  gloomy  chamber,  propped 
against  a temple  or  a noble  mansion,  in  which  he  slept  in 
contented  celibacy ; but  while  the  sun  was  in  the  heavens  he 
lounged  in  the  halls  of  his  Castle  of  Indolence  ; or  if  he  wan- 
dered from  them  to  the  circus,  the  theatre,  or  the  campus,  he 
returned  again  from  every  place  of  occasional  entertainment 
to  take  his  ease  in  his  baths.1 

After  all,  this  club-life  was  monotonous  and  might  be- 
come dull.  Excitement  was  required  to  vary  it,  and  the 
emperors  found  the  means  of  excitement  already  Erect1on  of  the 
furnished  by  the  institutions  of  an  earlier  age.  Colosseum. 

It  only  remained  for  men,  in  their  care  for  their  clients’  in- 
terests, to  enhance  these  means  and  extend  them.  In  vain 

1 To  the  passages  of  Seneca  and  Petronius,  indicated  in  an  earlier  reference 
to  the  subject  of  the  Roman  baths  (chap,  xli.),  the  reader  may  add  the  86th 
Epistle  of  Seneca,  in  which  he  contrasts  their  splendour  and  luxury  in  his  day, 
with  the  squalor  of  those  of  the  age  of  Scipio.  But  the  author’s  style  is  too 
declamatory  to  command  our  unreserved  reliance,  and  it  is  not  easy  to  see 
where  the  rhetorician  is  describing  the  public  baths,  and  where  the  private 
dissipation  of  voluptuous  nobles  and  freedmen.  The  Christian  writers,  who 
denounced  in  the  strongest  terms  the  shows  and  theatres,  do  not  seem  to  have 
preached  against  the  baths,  except  as  regarded  the  promiscuous  bathing  of  the 
sexes,  which,  indeed,  was  forbidden  by  Hadrian.  Spartian,  Hadr.  18.  See, 
however,  one  vigorous  blow  at  them  in  Augustin : de  Catechiz.  rvdibus , begin 
ning : “ quamvis  in.sana  gaudia  non  sint  gaudia,”  &c. 


36 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  71. 


had  Cicero  and  Seneca  expressed  the  sentiments  of  men  of 
feeling  in  rebuking  the  horrid  taste  for  the  shows  of  the 
amphitheatre ; statesmen  and  rulers  were  obliged  still  to  feign 
an  interest  in  them.  Vespasian,  though  averse  to  shedding 
the  blood  of  gladiators,  exhibited  combats  of  men  with 
beasts.  Titus,  while  pretending  to  the  character  of  a philos- 
opher, actually  descended  into  the  arena  in  his  native  town 
of  Reate,  and  contended  in  a sham  fight  with  the  veteran, 
Caecina.1  But  the  accession  of  the  Flavian  dynasty  was  sig- 
nalized by  the  erection  of  the  most  magnificent  of  the  Roman 
amphitheatres,  and  this  too  was  built  within  the  limits  of 
the  vast  Neronian  palace,  and  probably  with  the  spoils  of 
that  labyrinth  of  masonry.  We  have  traced  already  the 
origin  of  the  double  theatre,  the  best  adapted  in  form  to  the 
shows  to  which  it  was  especially  devoted.  The  noble  edifice 
of  Taurus  had  been  consumed  in  the  recent  conflagration,  and 
no  other  of  the  kind  existed  at  this  time  at  Rome  ; for  one 
which  Caius  had  commenced  had  been  demolished  by  his 
successor.2  Nero  was  satisfied  with  the  longitudinal  area  of 
the  circus,  in  which  he  could  display  his  skill  in  charioteer- 
ing ; but  the  people  were  discontented,  perhaps,  at  the  in- 
terruption to  their  favourite  entertainments,  for  which  the 
circus,  obstructed  by  the  spina  which  ran  down  its  middle, 
was  little  adapted.  The  tradition  was  still  remembered  that 
Augustus  had  designed  the  erection  of  such  a building,  not 
in  the  distant  quarter  of  the  Campus,  but  in  the  centre  of  the 
city ; and  had  he  executed  his  design,  he  would  no  doubt 
have  created  a work  of  imposing  magnitude  and  splendour. 
This  project  it  now  remained  for  Vespasian  to  realize,  and 

! We  have  been  often  reminded  of  the  disgust  of  all  true  Romans  at  the 
citizens,  particularly  if  of  birth  and  rank,  who  contended  with  the  gladiators  in 
the  public  shows  ; but  we  must  remember  that  there  was  always  one  rule  for 
the  citizen  at  Rome,  and  another  abroad,  however  nigh.  Thrasea  was  not 
blamed  for  singing  in  a tragic  drama  at  Patavium,  nor  Titus,  we  may  believe, 
for  pretending  to  fight  in  the  aiena  at  Reate.  See  Tac.  Ann.  xvi.  21.  Dion 
Ixvi.  15. 

3 Suet.  Calig.  21. 


A.  U.  824.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


37 


every  motive  of  policy  urged  him  to  outshine,  in  so  popular 
an  undertaking,  the  liberality  of  his  greatest  predecessor.1 
The  spot  he  chose  for  the  site  was  in  the  hollow  between  the 
Esquiline  and  Cselian,  where  Nero  had  excavated  a fish-tank 
for  his  palace,  perhaps  the  lowest  level  within  the  city  walls ; 
but  the  elevation  to  which  the  building  attained  overtopped 
the  crests  of  the  surrounding  hills,  and  enabled  it,  in  the 
words  of  a very  sober  poet,  almost  to  look  down  upon  the 
summit  of  the  Capitol.2  The  three  tiers  of  arches,  divided 
by  columns  of  the  Doric,  the  Ionic,  and  the  Corinthian  orders, 
rose  one  above  the  other ; but  the  lowest  story  was  thus  in- 
ferior in  height  to  either  of  those  above  it,  which  seems  to 
detract  very  much  from  their  architectural  effect.  A still 
worse  defect  perhaps  is  to  be  found  in  the  lofty  wall  or  screen 
of  masonry,  pierced  only  by  few  and  narrow  windows,  which 
surmounts  the  light  and  airy  arcades  below.  This  upper 
tier  is  moreover  the  loftiest  of  the  four,  and  the  only  motive 
I can  imagine  for  the  stilted  height  to  which  it  is  raised,  is 
the  necessity  of  giving  a great  elevation  to  the  awning, 
which  seems  to  have  been  drawn  across  the  ample  area,  and 
which  must  have  sunk  considerably  from  its  own  weight  in 
the  middle.3 

1 Suet.  Vesp.  9. : “fecit  et  nova  opera,  . . . amphitheatrum  urbe  media,  ut 
destinasse  compererat  Augustum.” 

2 Martial,  de  Sped.  2. : 

“ Hie  ubi  conspicui  venerabilis  amphitheatri 
Erigitur  moles,  stagna  Neronis  erant.” 

Calpum.  Ed.  vii.  23. : 

“ Vidimus  in  coelum  trabibus  spectacula  textis, 

Surgere,  Tarpeium  prope  despectantia  culmen.” 

8 The  solidity  of  the  masonry  in  the  topmost  story  might  be  necessary  for 
the  support  of  the  wooden  framework  to  which  the  awning  was  attached.  In 
the  lines  just  quoted  from  Calpurnius,  a writer  reputed  to  be  of  the  age  of 
Domitian,  we  see  an  allusion  to  some  sort  of  wooden  scaffolding  at  the  top  of 
the  building,  and  such  a scaffolding  is  said  to  have  been  consumed  in  the  fire 
which  occurred  in  the  reign  of  Macrinus.  I am  tempted  to  conjecture  that 
such  was  the  original  construction,  when  the  edifice  was  first  opened  by  the 
Flavian  emperors,  and  that  it  continued  so  to  the  date  of  the  fire  ; the  upper 


38 


HISTOET  OF  THE  EOMANS 


[A.  D.  71. 


The  height  of  this  celebrated  structure,  the  cornice  of 
which  is  still  preserved  throughout  one  third  of  its  circuit,  is 
Dimensions  of  sa^  to  be  160  feet : the  major  axis  of  its  elliptical 
tins  building.  circumference  measures  615,  the  minor  510  feet, 
while  the  length  and  breadth  of  the  arena  itself  are  respec- 
tively 281  and  176  feet.  Rows  of  seats  rise  concentrically  to 
the  level  of  the  upper  story,  the  lowest  row,  or  podium,  be- 
ing assigned  to  the  senators,  the  vestals,  and  the  emperor 
with  his  j)ersonal  attendants.  Eighty-seven  thousand  spec- 
tators were  accommodated  within  the  Avails.  The  building 
was  of  the  rich  and  Avarm  travertine  stone,  or  encrusted  with 
marble ; the  most  conspicuous  parts  shone  with  precious 
gems  and  metals ; a gilded  network  protected  the  sitters  in 
the  lowest  rows  from  the  chance  assaults  of  the  animals  be 
neath  them,  and  the  precaution  was  taken  of  making  the 
topmost  bar  to  turn  on  a swivel,  so  as  to  revolve  at  a slight 
touch,  and  baffle  any  attempt  to  climb  by  it.1  We  are  natu 
rally  disappointed  at  the  slight  notices  preserved  of  a work 
so  magnificent,  which  was  justly  counted  among  the  wonders 
of  the  Roman  world,  and  which  is  invested  in  our  eyes  with 
a special  interest  as  the  scene  of  so  many  Christian  martyr- 
doms. The  eclogue  of  Calpurnius  seems  to  point  to  a period 
when  its  consecration  Avas  still  recent,  and  may  belong  to 
the  age  of  the  last  Flavian  emperor.2  The  name  of  Colosseum 

story,  as  we  now  see  it,  being  an  addition  when  the  amphitheatre  was  restored. 
Coins  of  Domitian,  indeed,  represent  the  building  with  its  present  architectural 
features.  But  if  such  was  the  original  design,  it  is  possible  that  it  may  not 
have  been  completed  till  the  later  date. 

1 Calpurn.  Eclog.  vii.  47. : 

“ Balteus  en ! gemmis  en ! illita  porticus  auro  ; . . 

Sternitur  adjunctis  ebur  admirabile  truncis, 

Et  coit  in  rotulum,  tereti  qui  lubricus  axe 
Impositos  subita  vertigine  falleret  ungues  : ” &e. 

For  a description  of  the  shows  of  the  amphitheatre,  see  Cassiodor.  Variar.  v. 
42.  Calpurnius  notices  only  the  combats  of  wild  beasts. 

2 An  attempt  has  been  made  by  the  recent  editor  Haupt,  to  place  this 
author  in  the  age  of  Nero.  His  arguments  appear  to  me  inconclusive.  The 
seventh  eclogue,  describing  the  amphitheatre,  ends  with  an  allusion  to  the 


A.  U.  824.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


39 


popularly  attached  to  it,  and  improperly  written  Coliseum, 
first  occurs  in  the  works  of  our  countryman  Bede  in  the 
seventh  century.  Its  origin  is  not  accurately  known,  and  is 
referred  by  some  to  the  gigantic  size  of  the  building,  by 
others,  with  more  probability,  to  the  colossus  of  Nero,  which 
was  planted  before  its  entrance.  The  name  of  Flavian  was 
dropped  perhaps  on  the  fall  of  the  dynasty  by  which  it  was 
raised,  and  the  later  designation  may  have  come  into  use  as 
early  as  the  age  of  the  Antonines.1 

The  Colosseum  far  exceeds  in  its  dimensions  any  similar 
structure  of  the  ancient  world ; but  from  the  specimens  we 
possess  of  the  Roman  amphitheatre,  we  may  con-  Eeflecticms  on 
elude  that  it  deviated  little  in  construction  from  the  c°lossemn 
the  approved  models  of  the  age.  The  name  of  the  architect 
to  whom  so  great  a work  was  entrusted  has  not  come  down 
to  us.  The  ancients  themselves  seem  to  have  regarded  this 
name  as  a matter  of  little  interest ; nor,  in  fact  do  they  gen- 
erally care  to  specify  the  authorship  of  their  most  illustrious 
buildings.  The  reason  is  obvious.  The  forms  of  ancient 
art,  in  this  department,  were  almost  wholly  conventional, 
and  the  limits  of  design  within  which  they  were  executed 
gave  little  room  for  the  display  of  original  taste  and  special 
character.  The  architect  of  the  Parthenon  or  the  Capitol 
was  almost  equally  confined  to  the  pattern  of  his  own  times. 
To  a lesser  extent  we  observe  the  same  peculiarity  in  regard 
to  our  mediaeval  edifices,  the  designers  of  which,  if  in  some 
cases  recorded,  are  seldom  put  prominently  forward,  and 

emperor  of  the  day,  which  seems  to  point  much  better  to  Domitian : “ Et 
Martis  vultus  et  Apollinis  esse  putavi.”  Comp.  Statius,  Sylv.  v.  1.  14. : “ Cui- 
que  venit  juncto  mihi  semper  Apolline  Caesar : ” and  1.  i.  18. 

1 For  these  details  see  Becker’s  Rom.  Alterthiimei',  i.  682,  and  the  other 
topographers.  Nibby  is  said  to  have  given  the  most  complete  description  of 
the  Colosseum,  and  his  successors  have  borrowed  from  him  and  from  one 
another.  The  measures  given  in  the  text  are  from  the  art.  “ Amphitheatrum" 
in  Smith’s  Did.  of  Class.  Antiquities.  Becker  states  them  from  Helchiori,  at 
15b  581,  481,  285,  182  respectively  in  Roman  feet,  which  are  to  the  English 
as  11 ’649 . 12.  The  number  of  spectators  accommodated  is  ascertained  from 
a statement  in  the  Nolztia. 


to 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMAN'S 


[A.  D.  Y1 


have  attained  little  celebrity.  It  is  only  in  periods  of  eclec 
ticism  and  renaissance,  when  the  taste  of  the  architect  has 
wider  scope,  and  may  lead  the  age  instead  of  following  it, 
that  interest  attaches  to  his  personal  merit.  Thus  it  is  that 
the  Colosseum,  the  most  conspicuous  type  of  Roman  civili- 
zation, the  monument  which  divides  the  admiration  of  stran- 
gers in  modern  Rome  with  St.  Peter’s  itself,  is  nameless  and 
parentless,  while  every  stage  in  the  construction  of  the  great 
Christian  temple,  the  creation  of  a modern  revival,  is  appro- 
priated with  jealous  care  to  its  special  claimant.  Yet  if 
there  be  any  value  in  posthumous  celebrity,  to  be  popularly 
known  as  the  creator  of  an  object  which  has  filled  the  eyes 
and  engaged  the  sympathies  of  sixty  generations ; which  has 
been  the  familiar  home  of  millions  of  our  species,  and  has 
dwelt  in  the  memories  of  millions  more ; in  which  the  recol- 
lections of  a dead  antiquity  have  so  long  centred,  and  which 
has  become  the  most  visible  of  the  links  connecting  the  past 
with  the  present ; — to  be  renowned  as  the  creator  of  such  an 
object  should  be  a crown  of  ambition  not  less  dazzling  than 
the  fame  of  excellence  in  history  or  epic. 

The  building  of  the  Colosseum  was  the  work  of  several 
years,  nor  was  it  completed  and  consecrated  till  after  the 
death  of  its  founder.  The  reign  of  Vespasian, 

Death  of  Ves-  . ° . 

pasian,  extending  over  one  decade,  passed  away  m un- 

a.  d.  79.  eventful  tranquillity,  ruffled  only  for  a moment, 
after  the  termination  of  the  Jewish  war,  by  one 
or  two  abortive  attempts  at  usurpation,  which  were  firmly 
quelled,  but  with  no  excessive  or  feverish  violence.  The 
character  of  this  prince  is  sullied  by  no  unnecessary  severity, 
unless  we  must  except  the  strange  story,  already  related,  of 
Sabinus  and  Eponina.1  His  administration  was  justly  re- 
spected at  home,  and  feared  not  less  justly  abroad.  Ho  Ro- 
man emperor  laboured  more  assiduously  in  the  path  of  honest, 

1 Victor  says  of  him  ( JEJpit . 9.) : “ hujus  inter  castera  bona  illud  smgmare 
fuit,  inimicitias  oblivisci ; adeo  ut  Vitellii,  hostis  sui,  filiam  locupletissime  do- 
latam  splendidissimo  conjungeret  viro.  Ferebat  patienter  amicorum  motua,” 
&e.  Comp,  de  Ccesar.  9.  init. 


A U.  824.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


41 


frugal,  and  yet  liberal  government : none  kept  the  military 
establishments  of  the  state  on  a more  imposing  footing,  or 
maintained  a firmer  attitude  of  defence  in  the  face  of  all  its 
enemies.  At  the  age  of  seventy,  full  of  toils  and  honours,  he 
was  called  at  last  to  his  rest  by  mere  natural  decay ; but  Ins 
death  was  perhaps  accelerated  by  the  immoderate  use  of  the 
cold  springs  of  Cutilise,  in  his  native  Sabine  country.1  Dur- 
ing his  illness,  which  was  of  some  duration,  he  refused  to 
relax  in  any  degree  from  the  routine  of  public  business,  and 
when  obliged  to  keep  his  bed,  insisted  on  the  admission  even 
of  strangers  to  his  presence.  In  the  crisis  of  his  disorder  he 
demanded,  possibly  in  an  access  of  delirium,  to  be  raised  up- 
right, exclaiming  that  an  Imperator  ought  to  die  standing  / 
a phrase  which,  whether  truly  ascribed  to  him  or  not,  may 
fairly  represent  his  character,  as  the  soul  of  military  disci- 
pline and  official  formality,  armed  with  strong  endurance 
and  unflinching  constancy.2  Though  we  find  it  impossible 
to  feel  enthusiasm  for  the  plebeian  emperor,  the  head  of  the 
Flavian  firm,  we  cannot  part  from  Vespasian  without  avow- 
ing  a higher  regard  for  him  than  for  any  of  the  Caesars  before 
him,  the  great  Julius,  the  universal  exception,  alone  ex- 
cepted.3 

Vespasian,  with  admirable  prudence,  had  admitted  his 

1 Cutilias,  on  the  Velinus  near  Reate  : celebrated  for  its  cold  springs,  Strab. 
v. ; Plin.  H.  N.  iii.  12.,  and  for  a floating  island  on  its  lake.  Senec.  Mat.  Quasi. 
iii.  25. 

2 Suet.  Fesp.  24.  Dion,  Ixvi.  17.  Victor,  Epit.  9.:  “ sanctus  omnia.” 
The  reign  of  Vespasian  extended  from  July  1,  822,  the  day  of  the  salutation, 
to  his  death,  June  23,  832.  He  had  adopted  the  practice  of  holding  the  con- 
sulship regularly  year  after  year,  declining  it  once  only  during  his  residence  at 
Rome. 

3 Tacitus  characterizes  Vespasian  coldly  and  harshly:  “prorsus,si  avaritia 
abesset,  antiquis  ducibus  par.” — Hist.  ii.  5.  We  have  seen  how  necessary 
ecen  parsimony  might  be  to  his  position,  and  how  nobly  he  redeemed  it  by 
iustice  and  moderation.  The  same  writer  also  speaks  of  him  as  the  only  em- 
peror whose  character  was  improved  by  the  possession  of  power ; which  seems 
to  be  a sneer  against  his  forced  submission  to  Nero’s  tyranny.  But  again  I 
must  repeat  that  Tacitus  too  often  makes  himself  the  mouthpiece  of  senatorial! 
Drejudiees. 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  79 


42 

son  Titus,  the  darling  of  the  army  of  Judea,  to  a share  of  the 
Titus  assumes  imperial  power,  on  his  return  from  the  East.  We 
the  empire.  have  seenhow  large  a share  the  younger  prince  took 

in  the  duties  of  the  censorship,  and  we  are  assured  that  it  was  not 
as  a designated  successor,  nor  as  a deputed  vicegerent,  that  he 
was  associated  with  his  father  in  all  the  other  functions  of  sover- 
eign rule.  The  historian  Dion  declares  accordingly  that  he 
cannot  draw  a line  between  the  termination  of  the  one  reign 
and  the  commencement  of  the  other ; and  I will  follow  him 
in  continuing  the  thread  of  my  narrative,  also  without  in- 
terruption.1 2 The  younger  Flavius  was  born  at  the  end  of 
the  year  which  witnessed  the  assassination  of  Caius,  andin  con- 
sequence of  the  favour  in  which  his  father  was  held  in  the 
palace,  he  had  been  introduced  as  a child  into  the  court  of 
Claudius,  and  educated  with  the  infant  Britannicus.3  An  as- 
trologer whom  i\T arcissus  had  employed  to  cast  the  young- 
prince’s  horoscope  had  ventured,  it  was  said,  to  predict  that 
Britannicus  would  never  succeed  to  power,  but  that  Titus,  who 
was  standing  by,  the  son  of  a good  officer  now  beginning  to 
be  noticed,  would  actually  attain  to  it.3  We  learn,  on  graver 
authority,  that  when  Vespasian  sent  his  eldest  son  to  offer  to 
Galba  the  devotion  of  the  eastern  legions,  it  was  commonly 
surmised  that  the  still  youthful  favourite  of  the  army  would 
be  adopted  by  the  old  and  childless  emperor.4  Titus  had 
now  served  with  distinction  both  in  Germany  and  Britain : 
his  skill  in  martial  exercises  was  equalled  by  his  intellectual 
accomplishments ; his  conduct  and  prudence  in  affairs  gave 
promise  of  a statesman  and  administrator,  and  his  abilities 
were  set  off  to  advantage  by  the  beauty  of  his  figure  and 

1 Dion,  lxvi.  17.  Comp.  Suet.  Tit.  6. : neque  ex  eo  destitit  participem  at- 
que  etiam  tutorem  imperii  agere.” 

2 Death  of  Caligula,  Jan.  24,  a.  d.  41.  Birth  of  Titus,  Dec.  30,  of  the 
same  year.  Suet.  Til.  1. : “ natus  est  tertio  kal.  Jan.  rnsigni  anno  Caiana 
nece.”  Britannicus  was  born  in  42. 

8 Suet.  Tit.  2.,  confirmed  by  an  allusion  in  Tacitus,  Hist.  ii.  1. : " priesaga 
responsa.” 

4 Suet.  Tit.  5.  Tac.  Hist.  ii.  1.  Comp.  Joseph.  Bell.  Jud.  iv.  9.  2. 


A..  U.  832.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


43 


countenance.1  But  beneath  the  reserved  and  measured 
blandness  of  the  Roman  popular  chief,  there  was 

1 1 7 . Relations  of 

in  Titus  an  impulsive  enthusiasm,  fostered  by  his  Titus  with 

i f i Berenice. 

connexion  with  the  East,  and  warmed  perhaps  to 
a fervent  glow  by  his  romantic  attachment  to  a J ewish  prin- 
cess. He  was  the  lover  and  slave  of  Berenice,  the  sister  of 
Agrippa ; and  when,  on  hearing  of  the  movements  in  pro- 
gress against  Galba,  he  turned  back  from  his  journey  west- 
ward and  left  his  mission  unfulfilled,  it  was  surmised  that  his 
vacillation  was  the  result  of  passion  rather  than  of  policy. 
He  paused  to  visit  the  temple  of  the  Paphian  Venus.  The 
goddess  was  worshipped  on  the  spot  where  she  emerged  from 
the  waters  to  rule  mankind,  not  in  the  most  exquisite  of  hu- 
man forms,  such  as  that  revealed  to  her  subjects  by  Apelles 
and  Praxiteles,  but  under  a rude  and  shapeless  emblem,  the 
meaning  of  which,  for  ages  forgotten,  had  once  perhaps  been 
comprehended  by  Tyrian  and  Sidonian  mariners.  Here  was 
an  oracle  still  in  high  repute,  and  Titus  consulted  it  about 
the  success  of  his  voyage  to  Syria.  Receiving  a favourable 
answer  on  this  point,  he  was  encouraged  to  inquire,  still  indi- 
rectly, about  his  political  fortunes.  The  oracle  was  cautious, 
and  veiled  its  reply  in  general  conventionalities.  But  the 
priest  then  beckoned  him  into  an  inner  chamber,  and  there 
disclosed  without  reserve  the  splendid  destiny  awaiting  him. 
The  promise  of  power  was  indeed  a deathblow  to  love.  The 
Roman  chief  was  well  aware  that  his  countrymen  would  not 
suffer  a Jewish  concubine  to  usurp  the  place  of  Livia  and  Ag- 

1 Besides  skill  in  music  and  versification,  it  is  specially  mentioned  that 
Titus  was  a rapid  short-hand  writer,  and  had,  moreover,  a knack  of  imitating 
the  writing  of  others,  so  that  he  used  to  say  of  himself  in  jest  that  he  might 
have  made  an  expert  forger.  Suet.  Tit.  3.  Victor.  Epit.  10.  Eor  his  per- 
sonal beauty  see  Tac.  Hist.  ii.  1.  v.  1.,  fully  confirmed  by  busts  and  medals. 
For  his  eloquence  see  Pliny’s  preface ; the  whole  tone  of  which  assumes  him 
to  have  been  a man  of  literary  accomplishments.  Sil.  Ital.  iii.  603  ; 

“ Turn  juvenis  magno  prescellens  robore  mentis 
Exeipiet  patriam  molem,  celsusque  feretur 
.dSquatum  imperio  tollens  caput.” 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


14 


[A.  D.  79. 


rippina.  But  Titus  accepted  his  fate.  Venus  in  her  own 
temple  yielded  the  palm  to  her  rival  Juno. 

The  time,  however,  for  this  sacrifice  had  not  yet  arrived, 
The  lover  was  first  to  he  the  instrument  for  the  destruction  of  his 
Gentle  ctarac-  mistress’s  city  and  nation.  Our  accounts  repre- 
ter  of  Titus.  sent  an  uncertainty  and  vacillation  in  the  conduct 
of  Titus  before  Jerusalem  unlike  anything  we  read  of  in 
other  portions  of  Roman  story.  We  call  his  treatment  of 
the  enemy  barbarous,  yet  among  the  Romans,  and  possibly 
among  the  Jews  themselves,  it  bore,  as  compared  with  many 
familiar  examples,  the  character  of  unusual  clemency.  The 
anxiety  he  manifested,  according  to  the  testimony  of  Josephus, 
to  spare  the  people,  the  city,  and  above  all  the  temple  of  the 
J ews,  strongly  contrasts  with  the  ruthless  ferocity  of  other 
Roman  conquerors.  All  history  bears  witness  to  the  softness 
and  almost  feminine  gentleness  of  his  disposition,  and  even 
in  the  horrors  of  the  siege  of  Jerusalem,  whether  from  super- 
stition or  from  a tenderer  feeling,  Titus  seems  to  have  de- 
served the  character  thus  ascribed  to  him.1  The  mild  and 
yielding  temper  with  which  he  is  painted,  appears  again  in 
the  romance,  for  such  it  must  be  designated,  on  the  life  of 
Apollonius.  The  sophist  is  represented  as  conversing  with 
him  at  Alexandria  with  the  utmost  freedom,  giving  him  ad- 
vice how  to  conduct  himself  in  the  government,  recommend- 
ing to  him  pedantic  counsellors  with  all  a pedant’s  assurance, 
and  accepting  with  complacence  the  homage  of  the  young 
philosopher  on  the  steps  of  the  throne.2  Whatever  may  have 

1 When  allowance  is  made  for  the  exaggeration  of  which  Josephus  is  con- 
victed, it  will  appear  that  the  severities  of  Titus  towards  the  Jews,  however 
frightful,  fell  far  short  of  the  ordinary  atrocities  of  Roman  warfare.  The  efforts 
he  made  to  save  the  city,  and  at  last  the  temple,  were  an  exception  to  the  gen- 
eral rule  of  destruction  which  had  been  carried  out  against  Carthage,  Syracuse, 
Corinth,  and  many  less  conspicuous  capitals.  But  the  Roman  generals  were 
often  moved  to  tears.  Thus  Marcellus  wept  over  Syracuse,  Scipio  iEmilianus 
over  Carthage.  Paulus  AEmilius  shed  tears  at  the  fate  of  Perseus.  Liv.  xxv. 
24.,  xlv.  4.  Polvb.  xxxix.  fragm.  2.  Dubois-Guclian,  Tadte  et  son  siecle,  if. 
288  : “ Cet  inconcevable  melange  de  pitie  et  d’inflexibilite  est  tout  Romain.” 

2 Philostratus  in  vit.  Apollon,  vi.  29,  foil.  vii.  8. 


A.  U.  832.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


45 


really  been  the  influence  of  Apollonius  over  him,  it  would 
seem  that  Berenice  retained  his  heart  in  complete  subjection, 
though  she  could  make  no  impression  on  his  judgment. 
Titus  the  imperator  obeyed  the  commands  of  public  duty 
to  the  letter.  He  overthrew  Jerusalem,  dispersed  the  Jews, 
abolished  their  political  nationality,  and  absorbed  in  the  em- 
pire the  realm  once  swayed  by  his  mistress  and  her  brother  ; 
but  he  still  knelt  as  a lover  at  her  feet,  and  after  the  fall  of 
her  country  invited  her  to  visit  him  at  Rome,  lodged  her  in 
the  imperial  palace,  and  acknowledged  her  publicly  as  his 
favourite.  Wife,  in  the  Roman  sense,  she  could  not  be,  yet 
to  men  in  private  stations  at  least,  to  men  of  all  degrees 
anywhere  outside  the  walls  of  Rome,  the  law  allowed  and 
society  tolerated  the  possession  of  a foreign  consort.  The 
Romans  winked  at  the  irregular  union  between  Vespasian 
himself  and  a Grecian  concubine.  But  there  was  something 
peculiary  hateful  to  them  in  the  character  of  the  Egyptian, 
the  Syrian,  and  above  all  perhaps  at  this  period  the  Jewess  ; 
and  when  Titus  appeared  as  associate  emperor  in  the  city, 
with  Berenice  by  his  side,  them  prejudices  rose  in  arms  against 
the  scandal,  and  were  not  to  be  appeased  without  the  com- 
plete sacrifice  of  the  connexion.  Titus  gave  way;  the  lovers 
reluctantly  bade  farewell ; and  Berenice  returned  desolately  to 
her  desolate  country.1  After  the  death  of  Vespasian  she 
once  more  visited  Rome  hoping  perhaps  that  her  former  ad- 
mirer, now  sole  emperor,  might  exercise  his  independence  in 
her  favour.  But  Titus  had  leamt  to  control  his  inclinations 
effectually,  and  among  the  many  proofs  he  gave  of  patriotism 
in  the  possession  of  power,  was  the  firmness  with  which  he  re- 
jected the  blandishments  of  the  foreign  enchantress.2 

1 Suet.  Tit.  1. : “ dimisit  invitus  invitam.”  Dion  seems  to  place  this  sepa- 
ration in  828,  five  years  after  Titus’s  return.  The  lady,  born  in  781,  would 
then  be  47  years  of  age.  Perhaps  we  need  not  take  Dion’s  date  strictly,  and 
the  event  may  have  occurred  somewhat  earlier. 

2 Dion,  lxvi.  15,  18.  Titus  remained  henceforth  unmarried.  In  early  life 
he  had  been  united  to  Arricidia  Tertulla,  of  an  equestrian  family,  and  on  her 
death  he  had  espoused  Marcia  Furnilla.  who  bore  him  a daughter,  to  whom  he 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMAN'S 


[A.  D.  T9. 


40 


The  favour  with  which  Titus  was  early  regarded  was 
manifested  in  many  ways.  The  Romans  specified  with  in- 
„ terest  the  spot  where  he  had  first  seen  the  light. 

Favour  with  x 0 7 

which  Titus  an  obscure  house  m an  obscure  corner  of  the  city, 

was  regarded  . . 

by  the  Eo-  and  they  continued  for  a century  later  to  point 

mans.  . J J r 

it  out  as  a relic  of  ancient  Rome  which  had 
escaped  the  fire  of  X ero,  and  the  other  fires  that  had  since 
occurred.1  They  readily  accepted  as  a fact  the  story,  which 
can  be  shown  by  a comparison  of  dates  to  be  groundless, 
that  as  a young  man  he  had  saved  his  father’s  life  in  battle 
with  the  Britons.2  They  believed  that  he  had  been  present 
at  the  banquet  at  which  Britannicus  was  poisoned,  and  had 
even  tasted  of  the  fatal  cup,  to  which  they  ascribed  his  sub- 
sequent weakness  of  health  and  premature  dissolution.  The 
stories  of  dissipation  in  which  he  indulged  after  his  return  to 
Rome,  and  the  scandal  he  brought  on  the  austere  manners 
of  his  family,  elevated  by  merit  to  the  first  place  among  the 
citizens,  might  have  caused  little  remark  but  for  the  severity 
with  Avhich  he  exercised  the  censorial  office,  and  the  hostility 
he  excited  among  the  knights  and  senators.3  At  all  events 
the  nobler  elements  in  his  character  must  have  become  better 
known  during  his  association  in  the  empire,  and  the  dislike 
in  which  he  may  at  first  have  been  held,  was  undoubtedly 
much  mitigated  before  the  death  of  his  father.4  His  succes- 

gave  the  imperial  but  ill-omened  name  of  Julia.  The  date  of  this  daughter’s 
birth  is  undetermined,  but  it  must  be  some  years  prior  to  her  father’s  associa- 
tion in  the  empire,  and  the  mother  seems  also  to  have  died  before  it.  Suet 
Domit.  22. 

1 Suet.  Tit.  1. 

2 Titus  was  born  at  the  end  of  794 ; see  a preceding  note.  Vespasian’s 
great  campaign  in  Britain  was  in  T9T,  and  if  he  continued  for  some  time  longer 
in  the  island,  he  must  have  returned  to  Rome  in  804,  the  year  of  his  consulship, 
when  Titus  was  not  yet  ten  years  of  age.  It  is  not  likely,  out  of  favour  as  he 
was  with  Agrippina,  that  Vespasian  ever  resumed  a command  in  Britain. 

3 Suet.  Tit.  T. : “ praeter  ssevitiam  suspecta  in  eo  etiam  luxuria  erat  . . . 

nec  minus  libido Suspecta  et  rapacitas  . . . denique  propalam  alium 

Neronem  et  opinabantur  et  prmdicabant.” 

4 Suet.  Til.  6. : “ ut  non  temere  quis  tarn  adverso  rumore,  magisque  invitia 


A.  U.  832.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


47 


sion  might  be  accepted  as  inevitable,  but  bad  he  been  so  ex- 
tremely unpopular  it  would  have  been  easy  to  insist  on  the 
association  of-liis  brother  with  him;  or  if  Domitian  were  even 
more  offensive,  other  measures  might  have  been  adopted  to 
control  his  authority,  and  make  him  feel  the  precariousness 
of  his  power.  But  not  a movement  was  made,  not  a murmur 
raised.  Titus  occupied  the  throne  alone.  Of  his  own  free 
grace  he  declared  his  brother  the  partner  of  his  empire,  and 
signified  that  he  would  appoint  him  his  successor ; but  he  be- 
trayed no  jealousy  of  the  nobles,  no  apprehension  of  their 
discontent,  no  uneasy  consciousness  of  their  dislike.  The 
frankness  with  which  he  treated  all  classes  of  his  subjects 
shows  that  he  felt  himself  on  terms  of  confidence  with  them. 
If  their  affection  to  him  had  ever  wavered,  he  speedily  re- 
covered it,  and  maintained  it  without  interruption  to  the 
end. 

However  this  may  be,  the  short  biography  we  possess  of 
this  emperor  is  henceforth  chiefly  occupied  with  the  praise  of 
his  goodness  and  liberality.  His  prosecution  of 

, _ . He  combines 

the  hateful  race  ot  delators  was  unrelenting,  the  suffrages 

. in  ••  ° both  of  the  no- 

Among  the  first  victnns  of  the  Colosseum  were  bies  and  the 
the  wretches  who  had  been  driven  by  their  own  populace‘ 
necessities  and  those  of  the  state,  to  inform  against  fiscal  de- 
faulters in  the  higher  ranks.  They  were  seized,  bound, 
scourged  in  the  amphitheatre,  sold  into  slavery,  or  banished 
to  the  islands.1  Titus  took  from  no  man,  he  gave  to  all  pro- 
fusely, he  made  a point  of  never  sending  a suitor  away  un- 
satisfied. JSTo  man , he  said,  in  answer  to  a prudential 


omnibus,  transient  ad  principatum.”  There  is  some  looseness  in  this  last  ex- 
pression, and  Suetonius  may  be  confounding  the  association  with  the  succes- 
sion. 

1 Suet.  Tit.  8.  Titus  legislated  for  the  greater  security  of  the  subject  against 
the  informers.  “ Yetuit  de  eadem  re  pluribus  legibus  agi,”  i.  e.  the  shifting 
the  ground  of  action  from  one  law  to  another,  “ quserique  de  cujusquam  de- 
functorum  statu  ultra  certos  annos.”  The  inheritance,  for  instance,  of  unmar- 
ried men  fell  under  the  Papian  law  to  the  treasury,  and  it  was  important  in  the 
interest  of  the  government  to  ascertain  the  civil  condition  of  the  deceased. 


48 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.D.  79. 


remonstrance,  ought  to  leave,  the  princes  presence  disap- 
pointed.  Remembering  one  evening  at  supper  that  he  had 
made  no  present  to  any  one  since  the  morning,  My  friends , 
he  exclaimed,  I have  lost  this  day.1  When  certain  nobles 
were  detected  conspiring  against  him,  he  not  only  pardoned, 
but  treated  them  with  peculiar  kindness ; and  when  they  at- 
tended him  in  the  amphitheatre,  gave  them  the  swords  of  the 
gladiators  to  feel  their  edges,  thus  putting  his  life  unreservedly 
in  their  power.2  Towards  his  people  his  demeanour  was  bland 
and  affable.  He  insisted  sometimes  on  abdicating  the  functions 
of  umpire  in  the  shows  which  he  himself  exhibited,  and  left 
it  to  them  to  determine  their  merits,  contenting  himself  with 
the  part  of  a private  spectator.  The  features  here  delineated 
may  be  thought  perhaps  to  represent  the  general  type  of  a 
popular  favourite.  But  the  point  to  remark  in  them  is  the 
completeness  with  which  they  combine  the  champion  of  the 
nobles  with  the  idol  of  the  multitude.  It  was  not  easy  to 
maintain  the  privileges  and  cherish  the  self-respect  of  the  one 
class,  and  at  the  same  time  to  humor  the  tastes  and.  caprices 
of  the  other.  Augustus  had  betrayed,  his  weariness  at  the 
entertainments  of  the  vulgar ; Tiberius  had  shrunk  from  them 
altogether.  Caius  and  Nero  had  abandoned  themselves  to 
the  people,  and  forfeited  the  regard  of  the  nobles;  the  at- 
tempts of  V espasian  to  conciliate  both  had  been  but  imper- 
fectly successful.  Titus  was  the  first  who  seems  to  have 
gained  equal  credit  on  either  side  ; and  we  may  thus  account 
for  the  pre-eminent  favour  he  enjoyed  with  his  countrymen, 
which  they  declared  by  the  title,  extravagant  as  it  may  seem, 
of  Delight  of  the  human  race.3 

1 Suet.  1.  c. : “ Amici,  diem  perdidi ; ” a phrase  which  has  obtained  higher 
appreciation  than  it  seems,  when  taken  with  the  context,  to  deserve.  It  is 
repeated  by  Eutropius  and  Victor ; the  last  writer  calls  it,  “ divinum  et  cceleste.” 
See  also  Ausonius,  G-raliar.  Act.  in  Gh-alianum,  Imp. 

* Suet.  Tit.  9.  Victor.  Epit.  10.  This  story,  which  recurs  again  in  the 
history  of  the  next  popular  emperor,  may  be  regarded  as  mythical. 

Suet.  Tit.  1.:  “ amor  et  deliciae  generis  humani,”  a phrase  repeated  by 
Eutropius,  vii.  14.  Ausonius  considers  the  defects  of  Vespasian  a foil  to  the 
merits  of  his  successor:  “cujus  nimia  parsimonia  et  austeritas  vix  ferenda  nu- 
ram  fecerat  filii  lenitatem.”  Gratiar.  Act.  1.  c. 


A.  U.  832.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


49 


Titus  was  beloved  by  the  Romans,  and  those  the  Romans 
loved  ever  died  young.  Fate  indeed  did  not  always  require 
that  they  should  suffer;  but  the  career  of  Titus  Disasters of 
was  not  only  brief,  but  clouded  in  its  latter  years  rei§n  of  Titus- 
by  a series  of  public  disasters.  The  city  was  visited,  in  the 
first  place,  by  a terrible  conflagration,  which  raged  unchecked 
for  three  days,  and  was  second  only  in  extent  to  that,  hardly 
yet  repaired,  of  N ero.  The  Capitol  itself  fell  once  Fire  at  Eomc 
more  a prey  to  the  flames.1  Again  Rome  suf-  and  Pestllence- 
fered  from  a pestilence,  in  which,  if  we  may  A- T>- 80- 
credit  the  statement  of  a late  authority,  ten  thousand  persons 
perished  daily  for  some  time  together.2  The  great  eruption 
of  V esuvius,  which  overwhelmed  the  cities  of  Campania,  was 
perhaps  more  alarming,  though  the  loss  it  inflicted  might  be 
much  less  considerable.  The  incident,  as  is  well  known,  has 
been  described  to  us  in  some  detail,  and  it  will  be  interesting 
to  dwell  upon  it  before  we  close  the  brief  annals  of  this  reign. 
A less  popular  prince  might  have  been  accused  of  himself 
setting  fire  to  the  city,  and  even  the  eruption  and  the  pesti- 
lence might  have  been  imputed  to  the  divine  vengeance  on 
his  crimes.  But  in  this  case  the  Romans  were  willing  to 
charge  the  national  sufferings  on  national  sins.  The  wrath 
of  the  gods  required  no  doubt  a signal  expiation,  and  the  ded- 
ication of  the  Colosseum  gave  room  for  the  display  of  pious 
magnificence  on  a scale  hitherto  unrivalled.  A battle  of 
cranes  with  dwarfs  representing  the  Pigmies  was  Eed;cation  of 
a fanciful  novelty,  and  might  afford  diversion  for  the  Colosseum- 

1 Suet.  Tit.  8.  Dion,  lxvi.  24.  Originating,  apparently,  in  the  outskirts 
of  the  Campus  Martius,  this  fire  injured,  rather  than  consumed,  the  Pantheon, 
and  several  circumjacent  buildings.  It  then  took  a southerly  direction,  to  fol- 
low the  order  of  the  names  as  given  by  Dion,  attacking  the  Diribitorium,  the 
theatres  of  Balbus  and  Pompeius,  the  portico  of  Octavia,  and  finally  the  Capi. 
tol.  The  S.  W.  summit  of  the  Capitoline  hill,  on  which,  as  I believe,  the  tem- 
ple stood,  immediately  overlooked  the  “ Octavian  edifices,”  and  would  thus  fall 
exactly  within  the  line  of  the  conflagration. 

a This  extravagant  statement  is  given  in  the  Chronicon  of  Eusebius,  who, 
however,  places  it  under  the  reign  of  Vespasian.  Suspicion  always  attaches  to 
the  Christian  accounts  of  Pagan  calamities. 

118  VOL.  VII.- 


50 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  1).  60. 


a moment ; there  were  combats  of  gladiators,  among  whom 
women  were  included,  though  no  noble  matron  was  allowed 
to  mingle  in  the  fray ; and  the  capacity  of  the  vast  edifice  was 
tested  by  the  slaughter  of  five  thousand  animals  within  its 
circuit.  The  show  was  crowned  with  the  immission  of  water 
into  the  arena,  and  with  a sea  fight  representing  the  contest 
of  the  Corinthians  and  Corcyroeans  related  by  Thucydides. 
From  the  amphitheatre  the  spectators  were  invited  to  the 
Haumachia  of  Augustus,  which  seems  to  have  afforded  more 
room  for  naval  evolutions,  and  here  the  siege  of  Syracuse  by 
the  Athenians  was  still  more  vividly  portrayed.  These  exhi- 
bitions endured  through  a hundred  days,  and  terminated  in 
a scramble  for  tickets  entitling  the  gainer  to  rations  of  bread, 
pork,  and  other  eatables.  The  generosity  of  the  most  ami- 
able of  princes  was  the  theme  of  every  tongue,  and  the 
echoes  of  his  praises  still  live  in  the  meagre  records  of  the 
time  which  have  preserved  so  little  besides.  When  indeed 
all  was  over,  Titus  himself  was  seen  to  weep,  perhaps  from 
fatigue,  possibly  from  disgust  and  vexation ; but  his  tears 
were  interpreted  as  a presentiment  of  his  death,  which  was 
now  impending,  and  it  is  probable  that  he  was  already  suf- 
fering from  a decline  of  bodily  strength.  His  health  had 
been  long  feeble.  He  had  tried  in  vain  all  the  remedies  sug- 
gested  by  the  physicians,  and  afterwards  by  the  priests. 
With  superstitious  feelings  kindled  at  the  Eastern  altars,  he 
sought  to  propitiate  heaven  by  strange  rites  and  sacrifices. 
His  constitution,  perhaps  always  delicate,  possibly  injured  by 
poison  imbibed  in  early  life,  was  said  to  be  weakened  by  the 
immoderate  use  of  warm  baths ; but  in  the  last  stage  of  his 
disorder  he  desired  to  be  conveyed  to  the  Cutilian  springs, 
where  his  father  had  sought  to  reinvigorate  his  old  age. 
Titus  lamented  effeminately  the  premature  decease  he  too 
surely  anticipated ; and  opening  the  curtains  of  his  litter, 
Death  of  Titus  looked  wistfully  at  the  heavens,  exclaiming  that 
A B 81  he  did  not  deserve  to  die.1  He  expired  on  the  13th 

a.  u.  884.  0f  September,  81,  having  not  quite  completed  his 

1 Suet.  Tit.  10. . “eripi  sibi  vitam  immerenti.” 


A.  U.  833.  | 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


51 


fortieth  year.  During  the  course  of  his  short  reign  of  two 
years  and  two  months,  counting  from  the  death  of  Vespasian, 
he  had  religiously  observed  the  principle  which  he  had  pro- 
claimed on  accepting  the  chief  priesthood,  that  the  hands  of 
the  gods’  first  minister  should  be  kept  free  from  any  stain  of 
blood.1 *  No  senator,  no  citizen  fell  by  his  orders.  The 
Romans  generously  affirmed  that  he  had  committed  no 
crime,  and  had  discharged  every  duty.  When  he  declared 
on  his  deathbed  that  there  was  but  one  thing  of  which  he  re- 
pented, they  surmised  that  he  was  anxious  about  the  fate  of 
his  countrymen  under  the  sway  of  his  brother,  and  accused 
himself  of  weakness  in  refraining  from  the  punishment  of 
Domitian’s  repeated  intrigues  against  his  life.  Snch  are  the 
soft  and  gentle  traits  that  predominate  to  the  last  in  this 
prince’s  character,  a temper  which  may  seem  amiable  at  the 
outset  of  an  imperial  career,  and  raise  hopes  in  the  inexperi- 
enced ; but  which  must  be  regarded  with  distrust  and  even 
with  apprehension  by  those  who  have  learnt  the  lessons  of 
history.  Titus  inherited  from  his  prudent  parent  a stable 
throne  and  a full  treasury : had  he  lived  to  exhaust  the  treas- 
ury,— and  his  brief  career  was  wantonly  improvident, — he 
would  soon  have  found  his  throne  shaken,  and  been  driven 
to  acts  of  repression  and  tyranny  which  would  have  black- 
ened his  fame  with  posterity.  It  would  be  harsh  on  a mere 
guess  at  future  possibilities,  to  liken  him  to  Nero,  from  whom 
he  differed,  as  we  have  seen,  in  many  essential  features ; 
nevertheless  we  may  accede  to  the  judgment  which  was 
finally  passed  on  him  by  his  countrymen,  and  which  settled 
into  a maxim  with  later  ages,  that  he  was  fortunate  in  the 
briefness  of  his  power.3 

The  virtuous  character  which  the  Romans  agreed  to  as- 

1 Suet.  Tit.  9.:  “ periturum  se  potius  quam  perditurum  affirmans.”  Vari- 
ous conflicting  reports  of  the  cause  and  manner  of  this  prince’s  death  are  given 
by  Suetonius,  Dion,  Plutarch,  Victor,  Eusebius,  and  others,  and  are  collected 

by  Reimar  in  a note  to  Dion,  lxvi.  26. 

3 Ausonius,  Ordo  Inperal. : “ Titus  imperii  felis  brevitate.”  Comp.  Dion, 
lxvi.  18. : Taxa  av  kl eyx^elg  elye  km  paupbv  bn  evTV%ia  ix^e'covi  $ 

apery  exp^aro. 


52 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A,  H.  81 


cribe  to  Titus  has  not  been  impugned  by  the  compilei's  of 
„ Christian  tradition.  The  conqueror  of  Jerusalem 

View  of  Titus’s  . 1 

character  taken  had  learnt  perhaps  from  his  intercourse  with  the 

by  the  Chris-  . . . . 

tians  and  the  Eastern  spiritualists  to  regard  with  religious  awe 

Jews.  , 1 . . . ° . , , , ° 

the  great  events  m which  he  had  borne  a part, 
and  to  conceive  of  himself  as  of  a special  minister  of  the  di 
vine  judgments.  As  such  he  was  hailed  without  hesitation 
by  the  historian  Orosius,  who  expounds  the  course  of  Provi- 
dence in  Roman  affairs  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  Chris- 
tians.1 The  closing  of  Janus  on  the  fall  of  the  Jewish  city, 
appears  to  this  writer  a counterpart  to  the  announcement  of 
universal  peace  at  the  birth  of  Jesus.  He  passes  lightly  over 
theNcalamities  of  Titus’s  reign,  the  fire,  the  pestilence,  and  the 
volcanic  eruptions,  as  well  as  his  premature  decease,  all  which 
had  he  lifted  a hand  against  the  Christians,  would  have  been 
branded  as  manifest  tokens  of  divine  vengeance.3  But  with 
the  Jews  it  was  far  otherwise.  By  them  the  memory  of  the 
Flavian  princes  was  naturally  held  in  the  deepest  abhorrence. 

They  asserted  that  Vespasian  commenced  a cruel 

Jewish  legend  , . . „ , , 

on  the  death  persecution  ot  the  presumed  lineage  ol  the  roval 
of  Titus.  1 ° J 

David,  ihe  disasters  ot  the  doomed  prmcipate 
of  Titus  they  regarded  with  grim  exultation.  They  gloated 

1 Though  we  may  smile  at  the  confidence  with  which  Orosius  has  judged 
the  divine  decrees,  we  must  signalize  him  as  the  first  secular  historian  who  di- 
rected men’s  views  to  the  providential  guidance  of  human  history,  an  inevitable 
subject  of  Christian  speculation,  however  hazardous,  of  which  we  may  say,  like 
the  science  of  the  mathematici,  “ et  vetabitur  semper  et  retinebitur.” 

2 Oros.  vii.  9.  Comp.  Euseb.  Hist.  Eccl.  iii.  12.  IT.  A late  Christian  his- 
torian, of  inferior  authority,  Sulpicius  Severus,  asserts  that  Titus  was  induced 
to  destroy  the  Temple,  from  the  idea  that  it  was  the  centre  and  stronghold  of 
the  Christian  faith,  Hist.  Sacr.  ii.  44. ; and  it  has  been  attempted  to  show  that 
this  writer  took  his  information  from  the  lost  narrative  of  Tacitus.  Some  ot 
the  phrases  of  Sulpicius  may,  indeed,  remind  us  of  the  style  of  Tacitus : “ At 
contra  alii  et  Titus  ipse  evertendum  templum  imprimis  censebant : quo  plenius 
Judseorum  et  Christianorum  religio  tolleretur.  Quippe  has  religiones,  licet 
contrarias  sibi,  iisdem  tamen  auctoribus  profectas  ; Christianos  ex  Judasis  ex- 
stitisse ; radice  sublata  stirpem  facile perituram,"  &c.  But  Sulpicius  is  a mani- 
fest imitator,  and  we  need  not  infer  from  such  an  apparent  resemblance  that  he 
actually  copied  the  words  of  Tacitus. 


A.  U.  834. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


53 


over  his  shattered  health,  which  they  attributed  to  divine  ven- 
geance, and  inserted  among  their  legends  a wild  account  of 
the  nature  of  his  sufferings.  The  conqueror  of  Jerusalem,  they 
said,  had  desecrated  the  Temple  of  the  Most  High  with  orgies 
suited  to  the  shrine  of  the  Paphian  V enus.  He  had  pierced  the 
veil  with  his  sword,  before  tearing  it  down  to  wrap  the 
sacred  vessels,  and  transport  them  to  Rome.  Assailed  on  his 
voyage  homeward,  and  nigh  to  perishing  by  tempest,  he  had 
impiously  exclaimed,  The  god  of  the  Jews  who  drowned 
Pharaoh  has  power  on  the  waters , but  I am  more  than  his 
match  on  land.  Jehovah  suffered  him  to  gain  the  shore,  and 
there,  in  scorn  of  the  scorner,  sent  a gnat  to  creep  into  his 
nostrils  and  lodge  itself  in  his  brain.  For  seven  years  the 
restless  insect  gnawed  the  vital  tissue.  One  day,  when  the 
tortured  prince  passed  by  a blacksmith’s  forge,  the  thunders 
of  the  hammer  seemed  to  startle  and  arrest  it.  F our  pieces 
of  silver  daily  did  the  sufferer  give  to  have  the  noise  contin- 
ued in  his  ear  without  ceasing.  At  the  end  of  thirty  miser- 
able days  the  insect  became  accustomed  to  the  clang  and 
resumed  his  ravages.  Phineas,  the  son  of  Erouba,  was 
present  with  the  chief  nobles  of  Rome  at  the  death  of  the 
emperor.  The  Jewish  witness  reported  that  the  head  of 
the  deceased  was  opened,  and  the  creature  was  there  dis- 
covered as  big  as  a swallow,  with  a bi'azen  beak  and  claws 
of  iron.1 

Thus  it  is  that  the  disappearance  from  the  stage  of  life  of 
a weak,  though  perhaps  a pleasing  unit  in  the  great  sum,  may 
be  recorded  by  many  pens,  remembered  through 

" J ° Destruction  of 

many  generations,  attended  with  sighs  or  sneers  Hercniannm 
of  millions,  if  fortune  has  placed  it  in  a conspicu-  and  Pumptn* 
ous  position.  Almost  at  the  same  moment,  whole  hives  of 
human  beings,  historic  cities,  monuments  of  the  arts  of  ages, 
may  subside  into  annihilation,  and  pass,  almost  without  no- 
tice, into  the  night  of  oblivion.  Herculanum  and  Pompeii 
vanished  from  before  the  eyes  of  Italy,  like  the  scenes  of  a 
theatre,  and  their  awful  disappearance,  strange  to  say,  at* 


1 Salvador,  from  the  Talmud : Domin.  Rom.  a:  Jvdee.  ii.  498. 


54 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  81. 


tracted  hardly  a more  lasting  interest.  Yet,  the  disaster  it- 
self was  one  of  the  most  signal  in  human  annals,  and  is  con- 
nected with  circumstances  which  have  heen  related  for  us  in 
a picturesque  and  striking  manner,  and  have  engaged  the 
sympathies  of  many  readers  through  a long  succession  of 
ages.  The  same  eruption  of  Vesuvius  which  overwhelmed 
the  cities  of  Campania,  scorched  and  stifled  the  great  natu- 
ralist Pliny,  and  the  account  of  the  catastrophe  is  minutely 
detailed  by  the  most  elegant  writer  of  the  day,  himself  part- 
ly an  eye-witness. 

We  have  learnt  from  moralists  the  habit  of  contrasting 
the  works  of  art  and  nature,  as  types  of  the  perishable  and 
the  eternal.  Yet  in  some  respects,  and  under 

Changes  in  the  . . . „ 

physical  aspect  certain  conditions,  the  outward  framework  oi 

and  the  Cam-  nature  is  not  less  liable  to  change  and  dissolution 
paman  coast.  tpan  £]iat  0f  more  human  creations.  In  the  Co- 
losseum, as  it  now  stands  before  us,  broken  down  through 
one  half  of  its  circumference,  and  at  one  spot  almost  levelled 
to  the  ground,  its  columns  and  architraves  ruined  or  defaced, 
its  surface  ruffled  with  the  scars  of  time,  or  the  rank  foliage  of 
a wild  vegetation,  we  behold  no  more  than  the  wreck  of  the 
glorious  amphitheatre  which  rose  in  complete  majesty  before 
the  gaze  of  V espasian  and  Pliny.  But  if  we  turn  our  eyes 
to  the  great  features  of  the  Bay  of  Naples,  its  shores,  its 
plains,  and  its  central  mountain,  we  may  remark  that  the 
destruction  of  two  considerable  cities  was  one  of  the  least  of 
the  changes  effected  in  the  scene,  by  the  revival  of  volcanic 
agency  which  dates  from  this  period,  in  the  region  of  V esu- 
vius.  This  mountain  had  been  the  greatest  of  nature’s  am- 
phitheatres ; the  ridge  of  its  truncated  cone  was  level,  like 
the  cornice  of  the  Colosseum ; its  sides,  steep  and  even,  were 
adorned  with  the  fairest  of  nature’s  handy  work,  with  forests 
of  oak,  chestnut,  and  ilex  on  the  north,  with  vines,  cultivate.  1 
or  growing  wild  to  its  summit,  on  the  south.1  The  interior 

1 Strabo  (v.  4.  p.  247.)  describes  the  fertility  of  the  slope  up  to  its  summit: 
to  bpog  to  01  ecraoviov,  aypoig  irepLoiKovpevov  nayKaTioig,  ■r'k t/v  Tjjg  Kopvippg-  am/) 
6’  eTTimSog  fiev  ttoXv  ftbpog  eariv.  The  forest  trees  of  the  region  hare  been 


A.  U.  S34.J 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


55 


of  the  summit  was  more  or  less  depressed,  and  the  masses  of 
igneous  formation,  and  broken  furrows  which  scarred  or 
seamed  it,  betokened  to  thoughtful  observers  that  it  was  the 
choked-up  crater  of  a volcano  extinct  for  ages.1  The  erup- 
tion of  the  year  79  effected,  possibly  at  one  blow,  the  ruin 
of  this  amphitheatre,  such  as  it  has  taken  centuries  to  ac- 
complish in  the  Flavian  Colosseum.  One  half  of  its  sides 
has  been  completely  blown  away ; the  remainder  has  been 
abraded  and  lowered  almost  throughout ; the  apex  alone, 
now  known  by  the  name  of  Monte  di  Somma,  may  still  show 
the  level  of  the  original  crater.  But  from  the  floor  of  this 
amphitheatre  has  risen  another  cone,  which  has  almost  filled 
it  with  its  accumulating  debris,  and  has  at  times  exceeded 
the  height  of  Somma  ; much  as  if  a larger  pyramid  than  that 
of  Cestius  had  been  piled  on  the  arena  of  the  Colosseum.2 
From  this  cone  torrents  of  molten  rocks,  and  showers  of 
burning  cinders,  have  been  for  ages  ejected,  and  the  luxuriant 
vegetation  of  the  mountain  slopes  has  been  consumed  or 
buried  for  many  hundred  feet  from  the  summit. 

The  peaceful  charms  of  Vesuvius,  such  as  they  appeared 
to  the  eyes  of  Virgil  and  Tiberius,  have  been  ti’ansformed  to 
terrible  majesty,  and  the  long  swelling  outline  of  the  fertile 

found  to  spring  abundantly,  at  least  on  the  northern  side,  whenever  the  moun- 
tain has  been  long  at  rest,  as  before  the  eruption  of  1611 ; but  Martial  cele- 
brates its  vineyards  in  his  time,  iv.  43. : “ Hie  est  pampineis  viridis  modo 
Yesvius  umbris,”  and  the  followers  of  Spartacus  escaped  from  the  crater  by 
ropes  of  twisted  wild-vines.  Plutarch,  Crass.  10. 

1 Strabo,  1.  c. ; whose  description,  however,  does  not  favour  the  idea  of  a 
deep  crater  at  that  period,  nor  indeed  does  Plutarch’s  account  imply  it,  though 
often  cited  with  that  view.  Vitruvius,  in  the  time  of  Augustus,  recognises  the 
tradition  of  Vesuvius  as  a volcano,  ii.  6.:  “non  minus  etiam  memoretur  anti- 
quitus  crevisse  ardores  et  abundavisse  sub  Vesuvio  monte,  et  inde  evomuisse 
•jirca  agros  flammam.”  Comp.  Diodor.  Sic.  iv.  21. 

2 Monte  di  Somma  is  3450  (French)  feet  high.  The  cone,  which  is  known 
by  the  name  of  Vesuvius,  has  been  recently  3700,  and  at  one  time  is  said  to 
have  exceeded  4000.  It  was  reduced  by  the  eruption  of  1855  to  a level  with 
the  rival  summit,  and  it  has  been  stated  by  eye-witnesses  of  the  agitation  of 
1861,  that  it  has  now  sunk  a little  below  it.  Every  year,  in  fact,  in  modem 
times,  has  produced  more  or  less  change  in  the  features  of  the  mountain. 


6G 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMAIC 


[A.  D.  79. 


hill  has  been  broken  by  frowning  cliffs  and  jagged  pinnacles.5 
Nor  are  the  changes  produced  on  the  plain  and  along  the 
coast-line  less  signal  than  the  transformation  of  the  ancient 
mountain.  The  Lucrine  lake  has  been  choked  by  the  uplift- 
ing of  a mighty  cone  from  its  abysses.  The  foundations  of 
the  mole  of  Puteoli  have  been  sunk  many  feet  into  the  sea, 
and  raised  again,  though  not  to  their  original  level.  Various 
remains  of  Roman  buildings,  and  lines  of  road  along  the 
shore,  may  be  now  spied  beneath  the  waters  ; while  on  the 
other  hand  long  strands  of  shingle  have  been  heaved  above 
the  surface,  at  the  foot  of  hills  which  the  action  of  the  waves 
had  once  scarped  into  precipitous  cliffs.  There  has  been  in 
fact  first  a subsidence,  and  again  a raising  of  the  whole  coast ; 
but  the  distance  at  which  the  ruins  of  Pompeii  now  lie  from 
the  sea  which  once  washed  its  walls,  is  attributed  not  so 
much  to  a change  of  the  relative  levels  of  land  and  water,  as 
to  the  accretion  of  volcanic  matter  from  Vesuvius.  Pompeii 
itself  is  covered  with  a mass  of  ashes  long  since  converted 
into  mould,  and  rife  with  the  seeds  of  vegetation,  to  the 
depth  of  about  fifteen  feet ; but  Ilerculanum  after  suffering  a 
like  catastrophe  has  since  been  more  than  once  overwhelmed 
by  streams  of  lava,  which  have  gained  a thickness  of  more 
than  twice  as  many  yards.  From  such  data  we  may  imagine 
how  entirely  the  face  of  the  country  has  been  changed  along 
the  southern  base  of  the  mountain  which  has  been  so  great 
an  agent  of  destruction  and  renovation.1 2 3 

1 The  date  of  the  Argonautica  and  Punka  may  be  determined  from  allu- 
sions to  fatal  activity  of  Yesnvius.  Yaleg.  FI.  iii.  208. : “ mugitor  anhelat 
Yesvius ; ” iv.  507. : “ Sic  ubi  prorupti  tonuit  cum  forte  Yesevi  Hesperi®  leta* 
lis  apex.”  Silius  Ital.  xvii.  594. : “Evomuit  pastes  per  ssecula  Yesvius  ignes.” 
Statius  recurs  more  than  once  to  the  subject,  -which  was  peculiarly  interesting 
to  him  as  a native  of  Neapolis.  See  Sylv.  iv.  4.  78.,  iv.  8.  4.,  v.  3.  205. 

2 There  is  something  affecting  in  the  delight  with  which  Pliny  describes  the 
charms  of  the  Campanian  coast  on  which  he  was  so  soon  to  perish  in  a general 
catastrophe.  See  Hist.  Nat.  iii.  9. : “ hinc  felix  ilia  Campania  est.  Ab  hoa 
sinu  incipiunt  vitiferi  colies  et  temulentia  nobilis  succo  per  omnes  terras  inclyto 

....  base  litora  calidis  fontibus  rigantur  . . . . et  hoc  quoque  certamen  An* 
tnaiice  voluptaiis  tenuere  Osci,  Graeci,”  &c. 


&.  U.  832.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


57 


Sixteen  years  before  the  date  of  this  fatal  eruption,  the 
populous  town  of  Pompeii  had  been  afflicted  with  a terrible 
earthquake ; but  the  language  both  of  Tacitus  Pompeil  af 
and  Seneca,  who  speak  of  it  as  swallowed  up  or  fitted  with  an 

. . . earthquake. 

destroyed,  is  plainly  exaggerated.  Xne  remains  ^ 

discovered  in  modern  times  attest  the  fact  of  a 
convulsion  which  had  overturned  some  of  the  principal  build- 
ings ; but  all  the  ordinary  habitations  of  the  people  were 
standing,  and  the  place  was  as  full  of  residents  as  ever,  en- 
gaged in  their  usual  concerns,  when  the  final  catastrophe 
overtook  it.1  Pompeii  was  a maritime  city  at  the  mouth  of 
the  river  Sarnus,  the  most  sheltered  recess  of  the  Neapolitan 
Crater.  Its  origin  was  lost  in  antiquity,  and  the  tradition 
that  it  was  founded  by  Hercules,  together  with  the  other 
spot  which  bore  the  name  of  the  demigod,  was  derived  per- 
haps from  the  warm  springs  with  which  the  region  abounded. 
The  Greek  plantations  on  the  Campanian  coast  had  been 
overrun  by  the  Oscans  and  Samnites ; nevertheless  the  grace- 
ful features  of  Grecian  civilization  were  still  everywhere  con- 
spicuous, and  though  Pompeii  received  a Latin  name,  and 
though  Sulla,  Augustus,  and  Nero  had  successively  endowed 
it  with  Roman  colonists,  it  retained  the  manners  and  to  a 
great  extent  the  language  of  the  settlers  from  beyond  the 
sea.2  The  accident  which  buried  this  provincial  city  under 

1 There  is  a discrepancy  of  one  year  in  the  date  of  the  earthquake  in  Seneca 
and  Tacitus.  The  first,  who  was  a contemporary,  places  it  in  the  consulship 
of  Regulus  and  Yirginius  (tj.  c.  816.  a.  d.  63.);  the  other,  writing  six  years 
later,  assigns  it  to  the  year  before.  We  may  admit  with  Brotier  the  possibility 
of  the  shocks  having  commenced  in  the  one  year  and  terminated  in  the  next. 
Seneca,  however,  with  extraordinary  coolness,  speaks  of  the  entire  subsidence 
of  the  city : “ Pompeios  celebrem  Campani®  urbem,  ....  desedisse  terr® 
motu,  Lucili  virorum  optime,  audivimus.” — Nat.  Qucest.  vi.  1.  Tacitus  less 
strongly:  “et  motu  terrse  celebre  Campani®  oppidum,  Pompeii,  magna  ex 
parte  proruit.” — Ann.  xv.  22.  In  the  Nisi.  i.  2. : “ haust®  aut  obrut®  urbes : ” 
in  the  one  case,  swallowed  up  in  streams  of  lava ; in  the  other  overwhelmed 
by  showers  of  ashes. 

2 The  style  of  building  at  Pompeii  is  essentially  Greek,  but  such  a3  th« 
Romans  at  this  time  adopted  whenever  an  opportunity  occurred ; on  the  other 


58 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  71, 


a mass  of  cinders,  and  preserved  its  basement  at  least  invio- 
late for  seventeen  centuries,  has  furnished  us  with  means, 
which  we  should  vainly  seek  in  any  other  part  of  the  world, 
of  comparing  modern  forms  of  life  with  those  of  the  mixed 
Groeco-Romans  of  the  empire. 

Into  these  details  this  is  not  the  place  to  enter ; but  the 
account  we  have  received  of  the  fatal  eruption  is  valuable  for 
the  study  of  Roman  character,  as  well  as  for  its 
The  great  erup-  own  intrinsic  interest.  The  writer  is  the  younger 

tion  ol  Vesu-  . J 

vius  described  Pliny,  the  nephew  of  the  great  naturalist,  who 

by  the  younger  ...  ° 

Riiny-  describes  it  in  two  well-known  letters.1  The 

elder  Pliny,  the  friend  and  devoted  servant  of 
Vespasian  and  Titus,  at  this  time  commanded  the  imperial 
fleet  at  Misenum,  and  divided  his  time  with  marvellous  assi- 
duity between  the  discharge  of  official  duties,  and  the  accu- 
mulation of  extraordinary  stores  of  knowledge.  Remarkable 
for  his  industry  even  among  the  industrious  statesmen  of  his 
country,  Pliny  had  served  the  commonwealth  at  home  and 
abroad,  in  peace  and  war,  in  the  highest  posts,  never  inter- 
mitting throughout  his  career  the  habit  of  reading,  noting, 
and  composing,  till,  notwithstanding  the  multifarious  busi- 
ness in  which  he  had  been  immersed,  his  completed  works 
and  his  collections  for  future  arrangement  had  together 
reached  an  extent  almost  appalling  to  the  imagination.2  His 
compositions  on  contemporary  history  seem  to  have  soon 
fallen  into  oblivion,  and  we  possess  no  testimony  to  their 
merits  ; but  the  great  work  by  which  we  know  him  became 
the  recognised  repertory  of  all  the  accepted  facts  of  Nature, 
and  its  utility  secured  its  preservation.  His  labour  in  col- 

hand,  the  Romans  imposed  on  their  Grecian  subjects  some  of  the  worst  of  their 
own  fashions.  In  the  time  of  Nero,  Pompeii  was  deprived  of  its  public  shows 
for  ten  years,  as  a punishment  for  an  affray  that  had  occurred  there  during  a 
g.adiatorial  exhibition.  Tac.  Ann.  xiv.  17. 

1 Plin.  Ep.  vi.  16,  20. 

2 Plin.  Ep.  iii.  5.  The  contemporary,  or  nearly  contemporary,  histories 
were : 1.  A life  of  Pomponius  Secundus  ; 2.  A continuation  of  the  history  of 
Aufidius  Bassus  ; 3.  An  account  of  the  German  wars. 


A.  U.  832.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


59 


looting  facts,  and  his  assiduity,  and  to  a great  extent  skill,  in 
arranging  them,  deserve  our  highest  admiration  ; he  was  not 
gifted,  however,  with  much  talent  for  observation,  still  less 
does  he  deserve  from  his  powers  of  analysis  or  combination 
to  be  ranked  with  his  master  Aristotle.  But  the  ardent 
thirst  for  knowledge,  which  impelled  him  to  seek  the  scene 
of  interest  and  danger,  might  have  done  honour  to  the  wisest 
of  philosophers,  and  the  name  of  Pliny  will  ever  be  memorable 
as  of  an  ancient  martyr  of  science.  Such  was  the  irony  of 
fate,  that  while  the  most  illustrious  explorer  of  nature,  our 
own  immortal  Bacon,  died  from  a vulgar  cold  caught  in  the 
ignoble  experiment  of  stuffing  a fowl  with  snow,  his  prede- 
cessor, far  his  inferior  in  genius  and  intelligence,  perished 
gloriously  in  the  examination  of  a grand  volcanic  phenome- 
non. 

On  the  24th  of  August  in  the  year  79,  Pliny  was  residing 
in  his  villa  on  the  Misenian  promontory,  which  lies  about 
twenty  miles  in  a direct  line  from  the  summit  of 

* The  elder 

Vesuvius,  conspicuous  across  the  gulf  of  Naples.  Pimy  examines 

tt-  . _ , . , , the  eruption, 

His  attention  was  drawn  from  his  books  and  and  perishes  in 
writings  to  a cloud  of  unusual  form  and  charac- 


ter, which  hung  over  the  mountain,  and  rose,  as  appeared  on 
further  examination,  from  it,  spreading  out  from  a slender 
and  well-defined  stem,  like  the  figure  of  a pinetree.1  Its 
colour  changed  rapidly  from  black  to  white,  as  the  contents 
of  the  ejected  mass  of  which  it  proved  to  be  composed,  were 
earth  or  ashes.  The  admiral  ordered  his  Liburnian  cutter  to 
be  manned,  and  casting  aside  his  papers  prepared  to  cross 
the  water,  and  observe  the  phenomenon  nearer.  He  asked 
his  nephew  to  accompany  him,  but  the  younger  student  was 


1 Plin.  Ep.  vi.  16. : “ cujus  similitudinem  et  formam  non  aim  magis  arbor, 
quam  pinua,  expresserit.  Nam  longissimo  velut  trunco  elata  in  altum,  quibus- 
dam  ramis  diffundebatur ; ” i.  e.  with  a vertical  stem  and  horizontal  head ; 
such  as  the  phenomenon  has  often  been  described  by  subsequent  observers. 
Scacchi,  however,  noted  a different  appearance  in  the  eruption  of  1850  : the 
smoke  was  carried  off  in  a long  horizontal  stream  at  a small  elevation.  Roth, 
Vesuv .,  p.  248.  (1857.) 


60 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  79. 


too  intent  on  the  volumes  before  him  to  prosecute  an  inquiry 
into  the  operations  of  nature.1  Meanwhile,  intelligence  ar- 
rived from  the  terrified  residents  at  the  foot  of  the  mountain. 
They  implored  the  powerful  assistance  of  the  commander  oi 
the  fleet.  Pliny  directed  his  largest  vessels  to  he  got  ready 
and  steered  to  the  point  nearest  to  the  danger.  As  he  ap- 
proached the  shore  the  ashes  began  to  fall  thick  and  hot  upon 
his  deck,  with  showers  of  glowing  stones.  A shoal  formed 
suddenly  beneath  his  keel,  and  impeded  his  progress.  Turn- 
ing a little  to  the  right,  he  came  to  land  at  Statute,  at  the 
dwelling  of  a friend.  Here  he  restored  confidence  to  the 
affrighted  occupants  by  the  calmness  of  his  demeanor,  while 
he  insisted  on  taking  the  usual  refreshment  of  the  bath  and 
supper,  and  conversed  with  easy  hilarity.  As  the  shades  of 
evening  gathered,  the  brightness  of  the  flames  became  more 
striking;  but  to  calm  the  panic  of  those  around  him,  the 
philosopher  assured  them  that  they  arose  from  cottages  on 
the  slope,  which  the  alarmed  rustics  had  abandoned  to  the 
descending  flakes  of  fire.  He  then  took  his  customary  brief 
night’s  rest,  sleeping  composedly  as  usual ; but  his  attendants 
were  not  so  easily  tranquillized,  and  as  the  night  advanced, 
the  continued  fall  of  ashes  within  the  courts  of  the  mansion 
convinced  them  that  delay  would  make  escape  impossible. 
They  roused  their  master,  together  with  the  friend  at  whose 
house  he  was  resting,  and  hastily  debated  how  to  proceed. 
By  this  time  the  soil  around  them  was  rocking  with  repeated 
shocks  of  earthquake,  which  recalled  the  horrors  of  the  still 
recent  catastrophe.  The  party  quitted  the  treacherous  shelter 
of  the  house-roof,  and  sought  the  coast  in  hopes  of  finding 
vessels  to  take  them  off.  To  protect  themselves  from  the 
thickening  cinders  they  tied  cushions  to  their  heads.  The 
sky  was  darkened  by  the  ceaseless  shower,  and  they  groped 
their  way  by  torchlight,  and  by  the  intermitting  flashes  from 
the  mountain.2  The  sea  was  agitated,  and  abandoned  *>y 

1 Plin.  1.  c. : “ respondi,  studere  me  malle : — et  forte  ipse , quod  scriberemt 
dederat."  The  apologetical  whisper  in  the  last  clause  is  exquisite. 

s The  ashes,  as  Dion  had  been  informed,  were  wafted  not  only  to  Rome, 


A.  U.  832.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


61 


every  bark.  Pliny,  wearied  or  perplexed,  now  stretched 
himself  on  a piece  of  sail-cloth,  and  refused  to  stir  farther, 
while  on  the  bursting  forth  of  a fiercer  blast  accompanied 
with  sulphureous  gases,  his  companions,  all  but  two  body 
slaves,  fled  in  terror.  Some  who  looked  back  in  their  flight 
a ffirmed  that  the  old  man  rose  once  with  the  help  of  his  at- 
tendants, but  immediately  fell  again,  overpowered,  as  it 
seemed,  with  the  deadly  vapours.  When  the  storm  abated 
and  light  at  last  returned,  the  body  was  found  abandoned  on 
the  spot ; neither  the  skin  nor  the  clothes  were  injured,  and 
the  calm  expression  of  the  countenance  betokened  death  by 
suffocation. 

Such  is  the  account  the  younger  Pliny  gives  of  his  uncle’s 
death  from  hearsay.  In  another  letter  he  relates  the  circum- 
stances which  he  himself  witnessed  from  his  safer 

. . Pompen  and. 

post  at  Misenum,  and  as  might  be  expected  with  Bercuianum 

1 . . -,-n  abandoned  and 

more  vividness  and  distinctness : and  allowance  almost  forgot- 

ten, 

must  be  made  for  the  vanity  and  frivolity  of  ex- 
pression which  disfigure,  it  must  be  confessed,  the  dreadful 
tale,  from  the  youth  of  the  narrator,  who  was  but  eighteen  at 
the  time.  It  may  be  observed  that  his  remarks  give  no  indi- 
cation of  the  streams  of  mud  or  lava,  which  form  generally 
the  most  destructive  features  of  volcanic  convulsions.  The 
projected  volume  of  solid  matter,  such  as  sand  and  ashes  in  a 
state  of  ignition,  consumed,  as  we  have  seen,  all  the  habita- 
tions of  man  on  which  it  lighted,  or  if  its  heat  was  a little 
abated  by  distance,  engulfed  them  under  a ponderous  mass 
of  dust  and  cinders.  The  shower  was  wafted  perhaps  in 

where  they  were  supposed  to  have  caused  the  pestilence  which  ensued,  but  to 
Africa,  Syria,  and  Egypt.  Dion,  lxvi.  23.  In  later  eruptions  they  have  been 
carried  to  Africa,  and  even  to  Constantinople.  Valerius  Flaccus,  a contempo- 
rary, seizes  upon  this  incident  for  a novel  simile,  comparing  it  to  the  rapid 
flight  of  the  Harpies  (iv.  508.) : 

“ Vix  dum  ignea  montem 
Torsit  hyems,  jamque  Eoas  cinis  induit  urbes.” 

1 Plin.  Ep.  vi.  20.  Both  this  and  the  other  letter  are  addressed  by  the 
writer  to  his  friend  Tacitus,  with  a view  to  the  account  of  his  own  times,  which 
the  great  historian  was  then  compiling : “ quo  verius  tradere  posteris  possis.” 


62 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  79. 


various  directions  by  the  shifting  breezes ; Herculanum  to 
the  south-west,  and  Pompeii  to  the  south-east  of  the  moun- 
tain were  completely  overwhelmed  by  it,  while  other  spots 
between  them  and  around  them  escaped  almost  scatheless. 
The  eruption  seems  to  have  been  preceded  by  some  premoni- 
tory shocks,  and  it  is  evident  that  these  towns  were  in  a 
great  measure  abandoned  at  the  moment  of  the  catastrophe ; 
the  descent,  indeed,  of  the  falling  masses  was  not  too  sudden 
and  precipitate  to  allow  the  people  to  fly  themselves,  and 
remove  at  least  a portion  of  their  effects.1  Some  attempts 
seem  also  to  have  been  early  made  to  revisit  the  scene  of 
desolation,  and  repair  the  damage  inflicted ; but  fresh  heav- 
ings  of  the  mountain,  and  repeated  showers  of  ashes,  continu- 
ed to  baffle  the  survivors.  New  homes  were  found;  the  old 
treasures  were  abandoned  when  the  spot  where  they  lay  could 
no  longer  be  traced ; and  in  the  lapse  of  two  or  three  genera- 
tions the  careless  loungers  of  the  Campanian  coast  had  for- 
gotten even  the  site  of  the  ruined  cities  beside  them.2 

1 Dion  says  loosely  and  inaccurately,  lxvi.  23. : r6  re  ’EpKovXaveov  nal 
lloyiryiovg,  iv  deaTpip  tov  opiXov  avTfjq  Kadypevov,  narexuoe.  This  should  re- 
fer to  Pompeii ; but  the  theatres  excavated  here  and  at  Herculanum  present 
no  remains  of  a buried  population. 

2 Statius,  as  might  be  expected,  speaks  more  feelingly  of  the  calamity  than 
any  of  the  few  other  writers  who  allude  to  it ; but  even  he  is  ready,  within  ten 
or  twelve  years,  to  consign  it  to  oblivion.  Comp.  Sylv.  iv.  4.  81 : 

“ Mira  fides : credetne  virum  ventura  propago, 

Cum  segetes  iterum,  cum  jam  h®c  deserta  virebunt, 

Infra  urbes  populosque  premi,  proavitaque  toto 
Rura  abiisse  mari ! Nec  dum  letliale  minari 
Cessat  apex.” 

The  emperor  Marcus  Aurelius  moralizes  on  the  subject  a century  later: 
Hcdilaliones , iv.  48. — ’’Evvoelv  awexoic  irbaoc  fih>  larpol  aTroredv-f/icaai  .... 
iroooi  be  <piX6ao<j>oi  ....  itCooi  6e  rvpawoi  . . . nboai  be  •irbXtis  bX ai,  iv 
ovto>c  ei ttu,  redvr/icaac , 'EiU/oy  'cal  nal  ’HpaKXavov  nal  aX/.ai  avapld 

ptr-oi. 


A.U.  8S2.": 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


03 


CHAPTER  LXI. 


POMITIAN  EMPEROR. — HIS  EDUCATION  AND  CHARACTER. — EXTERNAL  HISTORY  OP 

THIS  REIGN. CAMPAIGNS  OP  AGRICOLA  IN  BRITAIN,  A.  D.  78-84:  A.  U.  831- 

837. HE  IS  RECALLED  PROM  THE  CONQUEST  OP  CALEDONIA. DOMITIAN’S  EX- 

PEDITION AGAINST  THE  CHATTI,  A.  D.  84. : U.  C.  837. — HE  CLAIMS  A VICTORY, 
AND  ASSUMES  THE  TITLE  OP  GERMANICUS. FISCAL  NECESSITIES  AND  COM- 
MENCEMENT OF  CONFISCATIONS. CAMPAIGNS  AGAINST  THE  DACIANS. DEFEAT 

AND  DEATH  OF  FUSCUS. — VICTORY  OF  JULIANUS. — PEACE  WITH  THE  DACIANS, 

a.  d.  90  : a.  u.  843. — a pretended  nero. — successes  in  Africa. — revolt 
OF  ANTONIUS,  A.  D.  93. : A.  u.  846. — renewed  cruelties  and  alarms  of 

DOMITIAN. 

IT  was  reported  that  Domitian  had  intrigued  against  his 
father,  and  there  was  little  question  but  that  he  had 
sought  to  supplant  his  brother.  Rumour  accused 

■ f • Domitian  as- 

mm  further  of  having  hastened  the  death  of  litus,  enmes  the  em- 

by  causing  him,  in  an  access  of  his  mortal  fever,  1 * u 
to  he  immersed  in  a hath  of  snow.1  Contemporary  history 
affirmed  at  least  for  certain  that  he  quitted  his  brother’s  bed- 
side, while  life  was  yet  in  him,  and  hurried  to  Rome  to  seize 
the  suffrage  of  the  praetorians,  and  secure  with  their  assistance 
the  homage  of  the  senate.  Titus  indeed  had  already  declared 
that  he  regarded  Domitian  as  the  partner  of  his  power,  and 
had  continued,  even  under  the  greatest  provocation,  to  point 
to  him  as  his  legitimate  successor.  It  was  in  vain,  however, 
that  the  gentle  emperor  had  sought  the  love  and  gratitude 
of  his  unworthy  brother.  Domitian  scowled  upon  him  with 
ill-disguised  impatience  for  his  decease,  and  when,  at  last,  he 
obtained  possession  of  the  throne,  declared  with  brutal  exul- 
tation that  he  had  himself  bestowed  it  upon  his  father  and 

1 I presume  this  was  in  fact  the  same  vigorous  cold  water  treatment  which 
had  saved  Augustus  and  killed  Harcellus. 


f>4 


HISTORV  OP  THE  ROMAN'S 


[A.  D.  81. 


brother,  and  now  received  back  his  own  gift  from  them.  lie 
discharged  the  formal  duty  of  pronouncing  the  funeral  ora- 
tion, and  soliciting  the  consecration  of  Titus  ; but  his  praises 
were  cold  or  insidious,  and  the  people  were  little  satisfied 
with  the  meed  of  honour  assigned  to  their  favourite.1 

Titus  left,  as  we  have  seen,  no  male  descendant,  and  the 
daughter  of  a Roman  house  could  not  take  the  inheritance 

of  her  father,  which  was  in  law  the  property  of 

ilis  claims  su-  . . x J 

iierior  to  those  the  family,  and  went  alone;  with  the  liability  to 

of  the  daughter  J 

of  Titus,  or  of  maintain  the  family  rights,  and  perform  the  prop- 

her  husband.  „ . _ . . ’ 1 , 

er  functions  of  a citizen,  lo  accept  the  ofhee  of 
princeps  or  imperator,  of  censor  or  pontiff,  was  not  more  im- 
possible for  Julia  than  to  assume  the  chiefship  of  a patrician 
house.  Domitian,  the  deceased’s  brother,  was  the  apparent 
heir  to  the  estate,  and  therewith  presumptive  heir,  according 
to  the  notions  of  the  time,  to  the  political  functions  with 
which  the  deceased  had  been  invested.  It  might  require  in- 
deed a vote  of  the  senate  and  a lex  curiata  to  confer  the  em- 
pire formally  upon  him  ; but  subject  to  this  formality,  his 
claim  might  be  considered  as  sufficiently  established.  The 
natural  feelings  of  paternity,  however,  were  beginning  to 
assert  themselves  against  the  long  descended  rules  of  law 
and  primitive  usages.  Titus  was  anxious  for  his  daughter’s 
happiness  and  greatness.  With  his  Asiatic  training,  he  had 
discarded,  no  doubt,  many  of  his  ancestral  prejudices,  and 
the  son  of  the  plain  Sabine  burgher  had  felt  no  scruple  in 
proposing  to  unite  his  daughter  in  marriage  with  his  oivn 
brother.  Such  unions,  as  we  have  seen,  had  been  legitimized 
by  Claudius,  but  they  had  not  been  sanctioned  by  public 
opinion.  By  the  genuine  Roman  they  were  still  reputed 
foreign,  oriental,  abominable.  Domitian  rejected  the  pro- 
posal. True,  he  might  feel  that  his  claim  was  too  strong  to 
require  any  subsidiary  support : true,  he  was  enamoured  of 
the  wife  of  a senator  whom  he  required  to  repudiate  her  hus- 

1 Comp.  Suet.  Domit.  2. : “ defunctum  nullo  prasterquam  consecrationis 
honore  dignatus,  sajpe  etiam  carpsit  obliquis  orationibus  et  edictis.”  Dion, 
lxvii.  2. : iravra  ra  kvavTi^Tara  uv  efioiiAero  aicjj’KTd/j.evog. 


A.  U.  834.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


65 


band  in  order  to  contract  nuptials  with  himself. 1 Nevertbe- 
less,  a purist  as  he  was  by  early  breeding,  and  a reformer  as 
he  afterwards  proved  himself,  and  uncontaminated  by  con- 
tact with  the  licentious  East,  Domitian  shrank  perhaps  with 
genuine  repugnance  from  the  questionable  arrangement  pro- 
posed to  him.  Julia,  thus  repulsed,  was  united  to  her  father’s 
first  cousin,  Flavius  Sabinus,  and  this  man  might  feel  perhaps 
aggrieved  that  the  splendid  inheritance  of  the  Caesars  should 
pass  out  of  the  line  of  natural  descent,  or,  that  he  should  not 
be  himself  adopted  by  his  father-in-law.  Hence  the  jealousy 
with  which,  as  we  shall  see,  Domitian  continued  to  regard 
him ; and  hence,  perhaps,  the  intrigue  which  the  emperor 
carried  on,  even  before  his  accession,  according  at  least  to 
common  rumour,  with  the  niece  whom  he  had  refused  in 
marriage,  but  whom  he  might  craftily  seek  to  attach  to  him- 
self by  the  tie  of  an  irregular  connexion.2 

The  personal  history  of  Domitian  indeed  has  been  made 
the  sport  of  common  fame,  and  we  need  hardly  trouble  our- 
selves to  analyse  it.  The  anecdotes  of  the  histo-  ^ -nst  dlspar. 
rians  are  put  together  with  little  judgment  or  x?j“nian°3 
consistency.  Suetonius,  for  instance,  assures  us  early  education, 
explicitly  that  the  advantages  of  his  distinguished  parentage, 
born,  as  he  was,  in  the  very  year  of  his  father’s  consulship,  were 
wholly  lost  to  him,  and  while  Titus  enjoyed  a liberal  educa- 
tion, Domitian  was  entirely  neglected  in  consequence  of  the  ob- 
scurity and  indigence  into  which  Vespasian  subsequently  fell.3 

1 This  was  Domitia,  daughter  of  Corbulo,  and  wife  of  iElius  Lamia.  Suet. 
Domit.  22.  Dion,  lxvi.  3.  Domitian  had  seduced  her  in  the  year  of  his  ad- 
ministration with  Mucianus,  when  he  was  himself  but  nineteen  years  of  age, 
and  had  soon  afterwards  married  her.  In  the  year  826  (his  second  consulship, 
Suet.  Domi*.  3.  Clinton,  Fast.  Fom.)  she  bore  him  a son  who  died  in  infancy. 
Domitian  continued  to  live  with  her,  with  one  interruption,  until  his  death. 

2 This  connexion  began,  apparently,  as  soon  as  Julia  was  betrothed,  and 
before  she  was  married  to  Sabinus.  Suet.  Domit.  22.:  “fratris  filiam  adhuc 
virginem,  oblatam  in  matrimonium  sibi,  quum  devinctus  Domitias  nuptiis  per- 
tinacissime  reeusasset,  non  rnuito  post  alii  collocatam,  corrupit  ultro,  et  quidem 
vivo  adhuc  Tito.” 

3 Suet.  Domit.  1.  Domitian  was  born  in  the  year  of  his  father’s  first 


66 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  81 , 


While  Titus  found  honourable  employment  in  the  camp  and 
rose  to  the  highest  commands,  his  brother,  we  are  told,  was 
suffered  to  grow  up  uncared  for,  in  a mean  corner  of  the  city, 
and  in  such  wretched  poverty  as  to  be  driven  to  the  vilest 
degradation  for  patronage  or  support.  But  even  the  same 
writer’s  casual  remark,  that '"the  young  man,  when  fleeing 
from  the  burning  Capitol,  took  refuge  in  the  house  of  a fellow 
student , shows  that  this  account  is  not  to  be  lightly  credited. 
Nor  is  the  reputation  he  subsequently  attained  for  literary 
accomplishments,  however  much  it  may  have  been  enhanced 
by  interested  flatterers,  consistent  with  such  abject  beginnings. 
Even  the  patronage  he  pretended  at  least  to  extend  to  let- 
ters, of  which  more  will  be  said  hereafter,  seems  to  evince  an 
appreciation  of  literary  adulation  seldom  found  in  the  grossly 
rude  and  ignorant.  His  mother  indeed  died  in  his  childhood, 
and  his  father  may  have  been  frequently  absent  or  engaged ; 
but  it  is  not  likely  that  the  nephew  of  a personage  so  distin- 
guished as  Sabinus  would  be  left  in  utter  destitution.  Domi- 
tian,  we  may  presume,  received  and  profited  by  the  usual 
instruction  in  grammar,  rhetoric  and  philosophy.  Possibly 
he  enjoyed,  from  the  Sabine  traditions  of  his  house,  a simpler 
and  severer  training  than  usually  fell  to  the  lot  of  children 
of  his  rank.  When  in  later  life  he  replaced  the  humble  ten- 
ement in  which  he  first  saw  the  light,  with  a temple  to  the 
Flavian  family,  we  may  trace,  perhaps,  the  act  not  to  super- 
stitious feelings  only  but  to  an  antique  sentiment  of  pious 
affection.1 

consulship,  a.  u.  804  (Oct.  24.),  and  was  therefore  ten  years  younger  than 
Titus. 

1 Suet.  Domit.  1.  Martial,  ix.  21. : 

“ Hie  steterat  veneranda  domus.  quas  prfestitit  orbi 
Quod  Rhodus,  astrifero  quod  pia  Creta  polo.” 

The  birth-place  of  Domitian,  and  consequently  the  site  of  the  temple  of  the 
Flavian  family,  was  at  a place  called  the  Malum  Punicum  in  the  Sixth  Region, 
denominated  Alta  Semita,  which  included  the  Quirinal  and  some  of  the  densest 
parts  of  the  Servian  city.  This  temple  is  not  to  be  confounded  with  that  of 
Vespasian  in  the  Forum. 


A.  U.  834.1 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


67 


Our  authorities  delight  iu  representing  the  younger  son  of 
Vespasian  as  a striking  contrast  to  the  elder,  the  darling  of 
the  Roman  people.  Yet  there  was  at  least  a 

A 1 Comparison 

strong  family  resemblance  between  them.  Both  between  Titus 

° J . ..  and  Domitian. 

were  constitutionally  impulsive  and  irritable, 
both  took  with  feminine  facility  the  varnish  of  patrician  re- 
finement ; both  were  naturally  voluptuous  and  sensual,  and 
surrendered  themselves  to  the  charms  of  Circe  and  the  Sirens. 
Had  Titus  been  left  at  Rome  in  his  tender  years,  exposed  to 
every  temptation,  and  denied  the  conduct  of  affairs  and  the 
discipline  of  active  life,  these  propensities  would  have  at- 
tained the  same  ascendancy  over  him  which  appeared  so 
fatally  in  Domitian.  But  whether  from  the  misfortune  of  his 
breeding,  or  from  his  natural  deficiencies,  the  character  of 
the  younger  brother  presents,  on  the  whole,  but  a pale  re- 
flection of  that  of  the  elder.  That  which  is  generosity  in  the 
one  becomes  mere  physical  sensibility  in  the  other.  Titus 
pledged  himself  to  shed  no  human  blood  during  his  princi- 
pate;  Domitian  proposed  to  forbid  the  sacrifice  of  oxen.1 
The  one  could  be  cruel  from  policy  or  necessity,  the  other 
from  mere  puerile  impatience.  Titus  wasted  Judea  with  fire 
and  sword;  Domitian  persecuted  the  flies,  and  made  a soli- 
tude of  his  chamber.2  The  deportment  of  the  elder  brother 
was  sociable  and  kindly,  and  if  he  enjoyed  with  too  keen  a 
zest  the  pleasures  of  his  station,  he  at  least  shared  them  ge- 
nially with  his  companions.  Domitian  is  described  as  morose 
and  solitary,  even  in  his  relaxations.  He  gave,  indeed,  the 
banquets  prescribed  by  custom;  but  they  were  joyless  and 

1 Suet.  Domit.  9. : “ inter  initia  usque  adeo  ab  omni  csede  abborruit,  ut 
absente  adhuc  patre,  recordatus  Yirgilii  versum,  Impia  quam  ccesis  gens  esi 
epulata  juvencis,  edicere  destinarit  ne  bores  immolarentur.” 

2 Suet.  Domit.  3. : “nec  quicquam  amplius  quam  muscas  captare,  ac  stylo 
prasacuto  eonfigere.”  When  it  was  asked,  “Was  any  one  with  Domitian?'* 
“Not  even  a fly,”  answered  the  witty  Crispus  (“  Crispi  jucunda  senectus:” 
Juv.  iv.  81.).  Comp.  Dion,  lxvi.  9.  Victor.  Epit.  11.;  Cces.  11.  Comp.  Plin. 
Paneg.  48. : “ non  adire  quisquam  non  alloqui  audebat,  tenebras  semper  secre- 
tumque  captantem,  nec  unquam  ex  solitudine  sua  prodeuntem,  nisi  ut  solitudi- 
nem  faceret.” 


68 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


LA.  D.  81 


hurried,  irksome  both  to  the  host  and  to  his  guests.1  Titus, 
again,  devoted  himself  nobly  to  sustain  his  father’s  interests, 
while  he  shared  his  fame  ; but  Domitian,  with  equal  ambition, 
was  meanly  jealous  of  his  brother’s  reputation,  and  anxious 
to  snatch  laurels  in  which  his  kinsmen  should  have  no  part. 
Frustrated  in  his  endeavours  to  emulate  their  military  glory, 
he  might  pretend  to  occupy  himself  in  arts  and  letters ; but 
neither  the  pleasure  of  study,  nor  the  praise  of  flatterers, 
could  really  soothe  his  wounded  vanity,  and  he  intrigued 
against  them  living,  and  detracted  from  their  merits  when 
dead. 

But  the  stately  march  of  the  Roman  princes  has  too  long 
occupied  the  stage  and  engrossed  our  whole  attention.  A 

new  scene  of  war  and  military  glory  may  here  q,e 

Prosecution  of.  . . J 0 J J 

the  conquest  of  interpolated  m the  imperial  drama,  and  remind  us 

Britain.  „ , 1 . . ..... 

ot  the  aggressive  attitude  which  m its  vigorous 
old  age  the  empire  still  retained  in  the  face  of  opposing  bar- 
barism. The  Britannic  legions  had  been  little  moved  by  the 
passion  of  the  civil  wars.  With  Galba,  at  least,  and  with 
Otho,  they  had  no  personal  connexion ; they  were  too  far  re- 
moved from  the  centre  of  affairs  to  covet  the  spoils  of  Rome 
and  Italy ; and  above  all,  their  hands  and  minds  were  fully 
occupied  with  the  toils  and  dangers  immediately  before  them.2 
But  the  accession  of  a great  military  chief  to  power  had 
roused  the  pride  of  the  soldiers,  and  given  a sudden  impetus 
to  the  career  of  conquest.  Y espasian  might  regard  with  per- 
sonal interest  the  complete  reduction  of  Britain  where  he  had 
gained  his  own  earliest  distinctions.  The  Fourteenth  legion, 
which  had  followed  Vitellius  to  Bedriacum,  had  been  sent 

1 Suet.  Domit.  21. : “ lavabal  de  die  prandebatque  ad  satietatem,”  i.  e.,  his 
solitary  morning  meal  was  ample  ; but,  “ convivabatur,”  he  supped  “ frequen- 
ter et  large,  sed  psene  raptim  : certe  non.  ultra  solis  occasum ; nec  postea  com- 
issabatur.” 

2 Tac.  Hist.  i.  9. : “ in  Britannico  exercitu  nihil  irarum.  Non  sane  alias 
legiones,  per  omnes  bellorum  civilium  motus,  innoeentius  egerunt : seu,  quia 
procul  et  Ocoano  divisae ; seu  crebris  expeditionibus  doctse  hostem  potius 
odisse.” 


A.  U.  834.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


69 


back,  flushed  with  victory  and  chafed  with  disap-  „ 

J m / Successive  pr3 

pointment,  to  its  quarters  in  the  island,  and  its  facts:  Petro- 

1 7 x . nius  Turpilia- 

discontent  could  only  be  allayed  by  the  excite-  nus,  a.d.  6i. 

, Trebellius 

ment  of  active  service.  But  since  the  removal  Maximus, 

of  Suetonius  Paulinus,  the  prefects  of  the  British 
province  had  been  directed  to  keep  the  sword,  if  possible,  in 
the  scabbard.  Petronius  Turpilianus  had  been  satisfied  with 
restoring  the  disturbed  districts  to  submission.  Trebellius 
Maximus  had  mitigated  the  severity  of  the  proconsular  gov- 
ernment, but  at  the  same  time  had  relaxed  the  discipline  of 
the  legions.  The  soldiers  pretended  that  he  was  immersed 
in  the  care  of  amassing  a fortune,  and  the  Twentieth  legion, 
disdaining  his  control,  had  broken  out  in  mutiny,  at  the  in- 
stigation of  its  chief,  and  driven  him  out  of  the  island.1  Tre- 
bellius had  repaired  to  Rome,  where  Vitellius  was  clutching 
at  the  purple ; but  the  tottering  emperor  could  give  no  sup- 
port. The  soldiers  rallied  together  for  their  own  security, 
and  the  peace  of  the  province  did  not  suffer  by  the  paralysis 
of  the  capital.  On  the  restoration  of  authority  at  Rome, 
Vettius  Bolanus  was  sent  to  take  the  command,  and  their 
recent  excesses  seem  to  have  been  prudently  overlooked. 
With  equal  prudence  the  mutinous  legion  had  declared  itself 
for  Vespasian,  and  the  Second,  which  he  had  himself  former- 
ly commanded,  naturally  sided  with  him.2  Tacitus  affirms 
that  the  new  governor  was  indolent  though  not  seditious ; but 
the  depression  of  one  chief  is  an  easy  artifice  for  exalting  his 
successor,  and  I am  tempted  in  this  instance  to  weigh  the 
testimony  of  a poet  against  that  of  an  historian.3  The 
praises  of  Statius,  however  overstrained,  seem  at  least  to  in- 
dicate that  Bolanus  placed  himself  at  the  head  of  his  movable 
columns,  laid  out  his  camps,  erected  his  tribunals,  fought  bat- 

1 Tac.  Ann.  xiv.  39. ; Hist.  i.  60.,  ii.  65. ; Agric.  16. 

a Tac.  Agnc.  16. ; Hist.  i.  60. 

3 Tac.  Agric.  8. : praeerat  tunc  Britannia  Yettius  Bolanus,  placidius  quam 
feroci  provineia  dignum  est.  Comp.  16. 


10 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


ties,  gained  victories,  and  dedicated  to  tlie  Gods  of  Rome 
the  spoils  of  vanquished  enemies.1 2 

Tacitus  might  have  remembered  that  it  was  impossible 
to  undertake  any  extensive  operations  while  the  loyalty  of  the 
legions  was  yet  unassured,  and  while,  from  the  want  of  rein, 
forceinents  and  the  cessation  of  the  ordinary  levies,  their  num- 
bers were  probably  incomplete.  C.  J ulius  Agricola,  a brave  and 
able  officer,  but  as  yet  unknown  to  fame,  was  placed  at  the  head 
of  the  mutinous  Twentieth,  the  head  quarters  of  which  were 
at  Deva,  whence  it  kept  in  check  the  Brigantes  of  Yorkshire 
on  the  one  hand,  and  the  Ordo vices  of  North  Wales  on  the 
other.3  The  recovery  of  this  corps  to  the  interests  of  Ves- 
pasian secured  the  position  of  the  Romans  in  Britain.  Peti- 
lius  Cerialis,  the  next  proconsul,  -was  enabled  to 

Petilius  Ceri-  ’ 1 ’ 

aiis,  a.  d.  71.  carry  on  offensive  operations,  and  Julius  Fron- 

juiius  Front;-  tinus,  who  followed  him  chastised  and  pacified 
nus,  a.  d.  75.  „ • . _ 

the  revolted  bilures.  I he  services  ot  Agricola 
coia,Uconsuf,gri  were  rewarded  by  promotion  to  the  government 
consul  in  Brit-  of  Aquitania,  from  whence,  in  less  than  three 
aiDA.i>.  78.  years,  he  was  summoned  to  Rome,  and  elevated 
a.u.  boi.  tjie  consu}s]1jp<  Vespasian  was  anxious  to 

maintain  and  possibly  to  extend  his  possessions  in  Britain, 
and  he  chose  this  distinguished  chief  as  the  best  instrument 
for  controlling  the  legions  and  pacifying  the  natives.3 

In  the  palmy  days  of  Rome  the  same  man  was  both  war- 
rior and  statesman : the  consul  led  the  Fathers  in  the  senate 

1 Statius,  Sylv.  v.  2.  144.  foil. : 

“ Hie  suetus  dare  jura  parens  ; hoc  cespite  turmas 
Affari : nitidas  speeulas  castellaque  longe 
Aspicis  ? ille  dedit,  cinxitque  base  moenia  fossa.” 

2 Agricola  belonged  to  the  colony  of  Forum  Julii  in  the  Narbonensis.  He 
was  doubly  devoted  to  the  defence  of  the  new  Flavian  dynasty,  his  father  hav- 
ing been  sacrificed  to  the  tyranny  of  Caius  Csesar,  and  his  mother  slain  by  ma- 
rauders from  the  fleet  of  Otho.  Agric.  4.  '7. 

3 Tac.  Agric.  8.  9.  During  his  consulship  (a.  tj.  8S0),  and  with  this  greater 
preferment  full  in  view,  Agricola  betrothed  his  daughter  to  Tacitus,  who 
appreciated  the  value  of  a choice  which  seemed  to  open  to  him  the  highest 
honours. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


71 


house  and  their  sons  on  the  battle  field : but  with  .... 

Agricola’s  con- 

the  change  of  manners  a new  theory  now  pre-  duct  as  gover- 

0 . „ „ nor,  and  first 

vailed,  that  the  profession  of  arms  unfits  men  tor  and  second 

. . 7.-7  . campaigns, 

political  attairs.  Many  think,  says  1 acitus,  that  a.  d.  is,  79. 
the  military  character  lacks  subtlety  and  tact.  ' ' 
damps  are  governed  by  strong  will  and  prompt  action  • and 
give  no  play  to  the  shrewdness  which  sways  the  forum.1  But 
Agricola,  to  follow  the  portraiture  of  his  son-in-law,  disproved 
this  theory,  or  served  to  confirm  it  by  one  notable  exception. 
His  administration  in  peace  was  just  and  temperate,  and 
showed  that  he  could  guide  the  men  of  the  gown  as  well  as 
he  could  command  the  men  of  the  sword.  His  first  care  was 
to  gain  the  confidence  of  the  provincials  and  engage  them  to 
embrace  the  arts  and  manners  of  their  conquerors.  He  pro- 
posed the  dress  and  language  of  Rome  for  their  adoption, 
and  taught  them,  with  more  success  than  any  of  his  prede- 
cessors, to  admire  and  cultivate  the  luxuries  of  southern 
civilization.  Meanwhile  the  flower  of  their  youth  was  draft- 
ed off  to  recruit  the  forces  of  the  empire  in  distant  regions, 
and  battalions  from  Gaul  and  Spain,  from  Thrace  and  Africa, 
brought  over  to  furnish  auxiliaries  to  the  legions  in  Britain, 
and  maintain  by  their  side  the  quarrels  of  the  empire.  Even 
iu  his  first  summer,  when  he  had  been  but  a few  months  in 
the  island,  and  when  none  even  of  his  own  officers  expected 
active  service,  Agricola  led  his  forces  into  the  country  of  the 
Ordovices,  in  whose  mountain  passes  the  war  of  independence 
still  lingered,  drove  the  Britains  across  the  Menai  Straits,  and 
pursued  them  into  Anglesey,  as  Suetonius  had  done  before 
him,  by  boldly  crossing  the  boiling  current  in  the  face  of  the 
enemy.  Another  summer  saw  him  advance  northward  into  the 
territory  of  the  Brigantes,  and  complete  the  organization  of 
the  district,  lately  reduced,  between  the  Humber  and  Tyne. 
Struck  perhaps  with  the  natural  defences  of  the  line  from  the 
Tyne  to  the  Solway,  where  the  island  seems  to  have  been 

1 Tac.  Agric.  9. : “ credunt  plerique  militaribus  ingeniis  subtilitatem  deesse ; 
quia  castrensis  jurisdictio  secura  et  obtusior,  ac  plura  manu  ageus,  calliditatem 
fori  non  exerceat.” 


72 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


broken,  as  it  were,  in  tbe  middle  and  soldered  unevenly  to- 
gether, he  drew  a chain  of  forts  from  sea  to  sea,  to  protect  the 
reclaimed  subjects  of  the  Southern  valleys  from  the  untamed 
barbarians  who  roamed  the  Cheviots  and  the  Pentlands.1 

To  penetrate  the  stormy  wilds  of  Caledonia,  and  track  to 
their-  fastnesses  the  hordes  of  savages,  the  Ottadini,  Horestii, 
, . , , and  Masatas,  who  flitted  among-  them,  was  an  en- 

Aerricola  estab-  . . ° 7 

lishes  himself  terprise  which  promised  no  plunder  and  little 

on  the  line  of  . 1 

the  Tyne  and  glory.  The  legions  of  Rome,  with  their  expen- 
sive  equipments,  could  not  hope  even  to  support 
themselves  on  the  bleak  mountain  sides,  unclaimed  by  men 
and  abandoned  by  nature.  His  camps  on  the  Tyne  and  Irth- 
ing  were  the  magazines  from  which  Agricola’s  supplies  must 
wholly  be  drawn ; the  ordinary  term  of  a provincial  prefec- 
ture was  inadequate  to  a long,  a distant,  and  an  aimless 
adventure.  But  Vespasian  had  yielded  to  the  ardour  of  his 
favourite  lieutenant ; ample  means  were  furnished,  and  ample 
time  was  allowed.  In  the  third  year  of  his  command,  Agri- 
cola pushed  forward  along  the  eastern  coast,  and  making 
good  with  roads  and  fortresses  every  inch  of  his  progress, 
reached,  as  I imagine,  the  Firth  of  Forth.2 3 * * *  Fie 

Reaches  the  / . 

isthmus  be-  had  quitted  the  waist  and  had  here  reached  the 

tween  the  . 

Forth  and  neck  ot  Britain,  the  point  where  the  two  seas  are 
divided  by  an  isthmus  less  than  forty  miles  in 
breadth.  Here  he  repeated  the  operations  of  the  preceding 
winter,  planting  his  camps  and  stations  from  hill  to  hill,  and 

1 Tac.  Affric.  18-20.  The  first  and  second  campaigns  of  Agricola  occu- 

pied the  summer  of  881,  832.  The  winters  were  employed — “ saluberrimis 
consiliis  ” — in  bending  the  minds  of  the  Britons  to  the  arts  of  peace. 

3 Tac.  Agric.  22. : “ tertius  expeditionum  annus  (833)  novas  gentes  .ape- 

ruit,  vastatis  usque  ad  Tanaum , asstuario  nomen  est,  nationibus.”  This  is  the 

true  reading  of  the  MSS.  for  which  Taum  (the  Tay)  was  substituted  by  Puteo- 
lanus  from  a marginal  gloss.  I cannot  suppose  that  Agricola  crossed  the  Firth 
of  Forth  in  this  campaign.  Wex,  in  his  edition  of  the  Agricola,  suggests  that 

Tanaus  is  the  North  Tyne,  which  falls  into  the  Firth  near  Dunbar.  Tan,  as  is 

well  known,  is  a common  Celtic  appellative  for  running  water,  and  may  possi- 
bly be  applied  to  the  estuary  itself,  although  Bodotria  is  the  name  specifically 
assigned  to  the  river  Forth,  if  not  to  the  Firth  called  after  it. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


73 


securing  a new  belt  of  territory,  ninety  miles  across,  for  Ro- 
man occupation.  The  natives,  scared  at  his  presence  and 
fleeing  before  him,  were  thus  thrust,  in  the  language  of  Taci- 
tus, as  it  were  into  another  island.  For  a moment  the  empire 
seemed  to  have  found  its  northern  limit.  Agricola  rested 
through  the  next  summer,  occupied  in  the  organization  of  his 
conquests,  and  employed  his  fifth  year  also  in  strengthening 
his  position  between  the  two  isthmuses,  and  reducing  the 
furthest  corners  of  the  province,  whence  the  existence  of  a 
new  realm  was  betrayed  to  him.  The  grassy  comes  in  sight 
plains  of  teeming  Hibernia  offered  a fairer  prey  ^ ^he  Mull 
than  the  gray  mountains  which  frowned  upon  his  of  Galloway- 
fresh  entrenchments,  and  all  their  wealth,  he  was  assured, 
might  be  secured  by  the  valour  of  a single  legion.  But  other 
counsels  prevailed ; Agricola  turned  from  the  Mull  of  Gallo- 
way, and  Ireland,  so  the  fates  ordained,  was  left  to  her  fogs 
and  feuds  for  eleven  more  centuries.1 

The  Caledonians  had  resumed  their  courage  during  the 
two  years’  inaction  of  the  invading  legions.  In  the  year  836, 
the  sixth  of  his  protracted  command,  Agricola,  Agricola  pene- 
understanding  that  they  were  collecting  their  therorth.°nd 
forces  to  make  a combined  attack  upon  his  lines,  A D 83 
determined  to  surprise  them  by  a rapid  incursion  A- 886- 
into  the  regions  beyond  the  Forth.  The  necessities  of  his 
own  armament  had  required  the  attendance  of  a naval  force, 
and  when  he  advanced  along  the  coasts  of  Fife,  he  drew  his 
most  certain  supplies  from  the  vessels  which  moved  parallel 
to  his  flank.  The  rude  natives  might  be  amazed  at  the  move- 
ments of  these  marine  monsters ; nevertheless,  they  were  not 
dismayed,  but  thrusting  themselves  between  his  advancing 
columns  and  the  fortifications  in  the  rear,  threatened,  if  they 
could  not  arrest  his  progress,  at  least  to  cut  off  his  retreat. 
Agricola  marshalled  his  forces  in  three  brigades,  to  meet 
them  at  various  points.  The  Ninth  legion,  the  same  which 
had  been  cut  up  by  Boadicea,  was  assailed  in  its  camp,  and 


119 


Tac,  Agric.  22-24.,  a.  u.  834,  835. 


74 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


only  saved  by  the  vigour  of  the  division  led  by  the  general 
in  person.  The  object  of  the  campaign  was  gained  perhaps 
by  the  discovery  of  a tract  of  fertile  plains,  stretching  along 
the  coast  for  many  miles,  and  the  invaders  might  return 
within  their  lines  for  the  winter,  with  the  expectation  of  fix- 
ing themselves  firmly  beyond  them  in  the  ensuing  summer.1 

Roused  to  redoubled  exertions  by  the  assurance  that  the 
ilying  enemy  had  now  but  little  room  for  retreat,  surprised 
and  encouraged  by  the  attractive  character  of  the 


Site  of  the 
great  batth 
with  GalgacuSo 


great  battle  lowlands,  which  continued  still  to  border  the 


A D g4  eastern  sea,  the  Romans  pushed  forward  in  a 

a.  u.  837.  seventh  campaign,  and  at  last  brought  the  Cale- 

donians to  bay  on  the  battle  field.  The  site  of  the  famous 
struggle,  which,  described  in  the  vigorous  narrative  of  Taci- 
tus, has  invested  with  equal  glory  the  names  of  both  Agri- 
cola and  Galgacus,  has  not  been  clearly  determined.  The 
opinion  popularly  received  is  unusually  moderate.  The 
imposing  remains  of  Roman  castrametation  at  Ardoch  in 
Strathallan,  have  drawn  the  attention  of  the  native  antiqua- 
ries, who  are  generally  content  to  suppose  that  the  invaders 
did  not  actually  penetrate  more  than  ten  miles  beyond  Stir- 
ling.3 To  me  this  spot  seems  to  lie  too  far  inland,  if  we  may 
suppose  at  least  that  the  legions  depended  on  their  fleet  for 
almost  all  their  supplies.  I should  presume  also,  that  in  this, 
their  second  campaign  beyond  the  Forth,  they  pushed  their 
successes  considerably  further  north.  The  fields  of  Fife  and 
Angus  are  seamed  with  numerous  vestiges  of  Roman  entrench- 
ments ; and  though  these  may  in  fact  be  the  work  of  a later 
generation  of  invaders,  and  though,  as  far  as  I can  discover, 


1 Tac.  Agric.  2S-27. 

2 The  great  camp  at  Ardoch  would  contain  about  30,000  men,  according  to 
the  Polybian  arrangement;  but  if  Agricola  adopted  the  system  which  pre- 
vailed certainly  under  Trajan,  and  which  was  probably  in  use  some  generations 
earlier,  this  camp  would  accommodate  fully  67,000,  and  this  is  a much  larger 
number  than  his  force  can  have  reached.  Hence  it  may  be  suspected  that  this 
camp  belongs  to  the  time  of  Severus,  who  is  said  to  have  penetrated  into  Cale- 
donia with  a much  larger  army.  See  Roy,  Military  Antiq.  p.  190.,  who,  how- 
ever, supposes  Agricola  to  use  the  Polybian  castrametation. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


there  is  nothing  in  the  character  of  the  entrenchments  them- 
selves to  fix  them  to  the  first  rather  than  to  the  second  or 
third  century,  I am  still  inclined,  on  the  whole,  to  place  the 
scene  in  question  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Forfar  or  Bre- 
chin.1 

The  speeches  put  into  the  mouths  of  the  rival  chiefs  are 
among  the  finest  gems  of  Tacitean  eloquence,  and  express  the 
contrast,  ever  present  to  the  philosophic  histo- 

’ 1 .....  Battle  of  the 

rian’s  mmd,  between  the  civilized  world  and  the  Grampians, 
barbarian,  their  respective  hopes,  fears,  claims  a. d.  si. 

and  destinies.  Whether  or  not  he  had  enjoyed, 
as  some  have  supposed,  an  opportunity  of  studying  this  con- 
trast on  the  spot,  during  an  early  residence  on  the  Germanic 
frontier,  his  instinct  seems,  at  least,  to  have  discovered  in  it 
the  germ  of  an  impending  revolution  in  the  fortunes  of  his 
own  countrymen.2  JSTor  is  the  battle-piece  which  follows, 
and  fitly  crowns  the  narrative  of  his  hero’s  military  exploits, 
less  celebrated  for  its  vigour  and  vividness.  To  us  it  is 
chiefly  interesting  for  the  glimpse  it  reveals  of  Roman  tactics 
at  this  period.  Agricola  had  with  him  probably  three  Roman 
legions  ; but  when  menaced  by  the  full  force  of  the  enemy, 
he  prepares  to  meet  the  attack  with  his  auxiliary  cohorts  of 
eight  thousand  men  in  the  centre,  and  his  auxiliary  squadrons 
of  cavalry,  numbering  three  thousand,  on  the  flanks.  The 
legions,  the  flower  of  the  whole  army,  are  drawn  up  before 
the  camp,  far  in  the  rear ; nor,  when  pressed  by  his  own  offi- 
cers to  employ  them  in  the  field,  will  he  consent  to  expose 
one  man  of  this  powerful  reserve  to  the  onset  of  the  barba- 
rians. All  the  loss  and  danger  must  fall  upon  the  Batavians, 

1 Tacitus  only  says,  “ ad  montem  Grampium  pervenit.”  Even  the  word 
Grampiw,  from  which  the  modern  geographical  name  for  the  frontier  ridge  of 
the  eastern  highlands  has  been  adopted,  seems  to  be  an  error.  The  best  MSS. 
are  said  to  give  Graupius.  Wex,  on  Agric.  29.,  and  Proleg.  p.  194. 

2 Pliny,  Hist.  Nat.  vii.  16,  mentions  a Cornelius  Tacitus,  a Roman  knight, 
as  procurator  of  Gallia  Belgica,  who  has  been  vainly  surmised  to  be  the  his- 
torian himself.  This,  however,  is  inconsistent  with  the  dates.  It  is  possible, 
nowever,  that  the  procurator  may  have  been  the  historian’s  father,  and  that 
our  Tani+'is  may  have  resided  as  a child  in  the  provinces. 


76 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


the  Usipians,  the  Gauls  and  Spaniards;  hut  when  the  day  is 
won  hy  the  hlood  of  her  subjects  it  is  Rome  that  reaps  the 
profit,  and  the  legions  of  Rome  that  reap  the  glory,  and  ac- 
quire the  titles  of  Rapacious  and  Invincible , Apollinean  and 
Minervian. 

This  battle  closed  Agricola’s  seventh  campaign.1  The 
short  summer  was  past,  and  no  further  progress  could  be 
a p sx.  made  by  land.  But  the  complete  reduction  of 

a.  v.  837.  Caledonia  was  still  present  to  his  view,  and  he 

meditated  fresh  plans  of  conquest  from  behind  his  entrench- 
ments on  the  F orth  and  Clyde.  Meanwhile,  he  directed  the 
fleet  which  had  attended  him  to  advance  north- 

Pretended  cir- 
cumnavigation ward  along  the  coast  from  headland  to  headland, 
of  Britain.  , 

and  carry  the  terror  oi  the  Roman  name  among 
the  remotest  tribes,  while  it  procured  him  the  information  he 
required  about  the  nature  and  resources  of  the  country.  The 
Roman  mariners  now  for  the  first  time  entered  the  Pentland 
Firth,  surveyed  and  counted  the  Orkney  islands,  and  gained 
perhaps  a glimpse  of  the  Shetlands.  They  ascertained  the 
point  at  which  Britain  terminates  northward,  and  possibly 
noted  the  great  deflection  of  the  coast  southward  from  Cape 
Wrath.  Having  effected  the  object  of  the  expedition,  they 
returned,  as  I cannot  doubt,  still  creeping  timidly,  as  was 
their  wont,  from  headland  to  headland,  and  having  hugged 
the  eastern  coast  from  Caithness  to  the  Firth  of  Forth, 
were  finally  drawn  up  for  the  winter  on  the  beach  from  which 
they  had  been  launched  at  the  commencement  of  the  season.® 


1 The  campaigns  of  Agricola  extend  from  78  (u.  c.  831)  to  84  (it.  c.  837) 
inclusive.  The  battle  with  Galgacus  was  fought  in  the  seventh  year.  But 
“ oclavus  annus  est,”  says  Agricola  in  his  speech.  Some  critics  suspect  an 
error  of  viii.  for  tii.  I hardly  think  Tacitus  would  have  used  so  weak  an  ex- 
ordium as  “ Septimus  annus  est.”  But  though  it  was  Agricola’s  seventh,  it 
might  be  called  the  eighth  campaign  of  his  army ; for  in  the  year  preceding 
his  arrival,  Julius  Frontinus  had  led  an  expedition  against  the  Silures. 
Agric.  17. 

2 The  account  I have  ventured  to  give  of  this  remarkable  expedition  re- 
quires some  justification.  Tacitus  says  [Agric.  38.),  “ Prasfecto  classis  circum- 

vehi  Britanniam  prsecepit et  simul  classis  secunda  tempestate  ac  fama 

Trutulensem  portum  tenuit,  unde,  proximo  latere  Britannise  lento  omr.i,  redie 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


77 

The  best  authorities,  Ctesar  and  Diodorus,  Pliny  and 
Mela,  had  long  before  asserted  the  insular  character  of  Bri- 
tain ; but  the  Romans,  up  to  this  time,  had  had  a very  im- 
perfect conception  of  its  size  and  figure,  and  when  the  legions, 
advancing  northwards,  season  after  season,  saw  the  moun- 
tain crests  of  Caledonia  still  rising  before  them,  and  the  ex- 
pected limits  of  the  island  still  constantly  receding,  they 
might  feel  some  distrust  of  their  geographical  information, 
and  require  a more  certain  assurance  of  the  fact  known  hith- 
erto only  by  hearsay.  The  demonstration  thus  obtained  was 
itself  regarded  as  a triumphant  achievement,  and  Agricola 
was  celebrated  by  his  countrymen  as  an  explorer 

J "E  1 Recall  of  Agri- 

as  well  as  a conqueror.  But  before  the  fleet  had  cola, 
returned  to  its  winter  station,  the  decree  had  none  a.  d.  84. 

® a.  tr  837 

forth  by  which  his  career  of  conquest  and  dis- 

rat.”  The  last  clause  is  crabbed  and  perhaps  corrupt.  Dion  (lxvi.  20.)  sup- 
poses the  fleet  to  have  circumnavigated  the  whole  island,  and  such  has  been 
the  usual  interpretation  of  modern  critics,  which  they  confirm  by  reference  to 
Agric.  10.  and  28.  I am  countenanced  by  Hannert  in  rejecting  this  interpre- 
tation. In  c.  10.,  Tacitus,  referring  by  anticipation  to  this  voyage,  says, 
speaking  of  the  projecting  part  of  Britain,  which  is  called  distinctively  Cale- 
donian : “ banc  oram  novissimi  maris  time  primum  Romana  classis  circum- 
vecta  insulam  esse  Britanniam  affirmavit ; ” that  is,  confirmed  the  inference 
previously  drawn  from  the  character  of  the  southern  district.  It  is  unneces- 
sary, therefore,  to  suppose  that  the  fleet  completed  the  circumnavigation  of  the 
whole  island  on  this  occasion.  Again,  in  c.  28.,  our  author  relates  the  incident 
of  certain  Usipians  in  the  service  of  Agricola  seizing  on  some  ships  by  which, 
“ circumvecti  Britanniam,”  they  were  at  last  wafted  to  the  coast  of  Friesland. 
Here  the  circumstances  cannot  reasonably  admit  of  the  common  explanation. 
“ Circumvehi,”  however,  does  not  necessarily  mean  to  be  carried  round ; but 
may  signify  simply  to  make  a sweep,  or  to  be  wafted  from  point  to  print.  Thus, 
Virgil  says:  “ circum  pictis  vehitur  sua  rura  phaselis.”  See  several  other  in- 
stances in  Forcellini  under  “circumveho,  circumvecto.”  The  Usipians,  as  1 
understand  it,  ran  down  the  east  coast  from  the  Forth,  till  they  came  opposite 
to  Friesland.  The  “ portus  Trutulensis  ” is  not  mentioned  elsewhere.  The 
critics  commonly  suppose  it  to  be  a false  reading  for  “ Eutupensis.”  But  the 
fleet  which  attended  upon  Agricola  must  have  had  its  winter  haven  in  the 
north,  and  nowhere  so  probably  as  in  the  Firth  of  Forth.  The  expedition, 
then,  according  to  my  view,  sailed  from  the  Forth  to  Cape  Wrath,  or  there 
abouts,  and  returned  the  same  way  that  it  went,  having  skirted  all  the  nearest, 
L e.,  the  east  coast  of  Caledonia. 


78 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  I).  84 


covery  was  to  be  arrested,  and  tbe  great  proconsul  was  him- 
self, in  obedience  to  bis  letters  of  recall,  far  advanced  on  tbe 
road  to  Italy.  Directed  to  transfer  bis  authority  to  tbe  suc- 
cessor assigned  to  bim,  be  obeyed  without  hesitation,  for 
Agricola  knew  bow  to  obey  as  well  as  to  command.1  Domi 
tian,  indeed,  according  to  a popular  rumour,  was  apprehen- 
sive lest  bis  victorious  lieutenant,  at  the  head  of  a province 
which  respected,  and  an  army  which  idolized  him,  should  re- 
fuse to  surrender  his  power,  and  challenge  his  imperator  to  a 
conflict.  He  sent  a freedman  to  him,  with  the  ofier  of  the 
government  of  Syria;  charging  him  at  the  same  time  not  to 
deliver  it  if  Agricola  should  have  already  relinquished  his 
post  unbribed.  The  envoy  encountered  the  returning  gen- 
eral in  mid-channel,  kept  the  letter  under  his  skirt,  and  restor- 
ed it  unopened  to  his  master.2 

The  bitter  charges  Tacitus  makes  against  Domitian,  the 
envy  and  dissimulation  he  imputes  to  him  in  the  matter  of 
jealousy  of  Agricola’s  recall,  are  such  as  from  the  tyrant’s 

pifted°to  Do"-  known  character  we  may  readily  believe.  Yet, 

mifian.  a better  and  abler  man  than  the  degenerate  son 


of  Yespasian,  might  now  have  hastened,  not  from  jealousy, 
but  with  a wise  discretion,  to  bring  the  British  campaigns 
to  a close.  It  was  hardly  consistent  with  prudent  policy, 
nor  would  it  have  been  permitted  in  the  sounder  ages  of 
the  Republic,  any  more  than  of  the  Empire,  that  the  gov- 
ernor of  a distant  dependency  should  remain  for  many  yeai  s 
in  command  of  all  its  resources,  with  the  entire  disposal  of 
its  places  and  emoluments,  with  a great  public  faction 
growing  around  him,  and  threatening  to  force  him  into 
a hostile  attitude.  Ho  proconsul  since  Caesar  had  waged 
seven  years  of  warfare  in  any  province,  and  the  memory  of 
Caesar’s  proconsulate  was  not  reassuring  either  to  the  senate 


1 Tac.  Agric.  8. : “ virtute  in  obsequendo  . , . extra  invidiam,  nee  extra 
gloriam  erat.” 

2 Tac.  Agric.  40. : “ credidere  plerique  . . . sive  verum  istud,  sive  ex 
ingenio  principis  Return  ac  compositum  est.” 


A.  U.  837.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


79 


or  the  emperor.1  Germanicus  had  been  recalled  after  three 
campaigns ; the  hand  of  Corbulo  had  been  held  from  year  to 
year  suspended.  1ST or  were  the  results,  calmly  considered, 
worth  the  hazard.  The  victories  of  Agricola  were  barren  ; 
his  conquests  were  merely  disappointments.  Never  before 
were  such  efforts  made  for  so  trifling  an  object.  The  reduc- 
tion of  the  whole  of  Caledonia  would  hardly  have  brought 
one  gold  piece  into  the  imperial  treasury.  But  the  expense 
was  enormous.  Britain  must  have  been  exhausted  by  the 
requisitions  imposed  upon  her  for  the  supply  of  men  and  mu- 
nitions ; her  tribute  must  have  run  low ; her  commerce  must 
have  languished ; the  progress  of  Roman  arts  and  manners 
must  have  been  arrested  within  her  borders.  The  long  career 
which  had  been  already  vouchsafed  to  Agricola  was  owing, 
perhaps,  to  the  premature  death  of  his  first  patron,  Vespasian, 
the  easy  indolence  of  Titus,  and  the  timidity  of  Domitian  on 
his  first  accession  to  a position  which  he  had  earned  by  no 
merits  of  his  own.  But  in  the  third  year  of  his  reign,  the 
emperor,  as  we  shall  see,  had  conducted  a campaign  in  per- 
son, and  Rome  acquiesced  in  his  claim  to  a victory.  Tacitus 
affirms  indeed  that  the  consciousness  of  his  own  failure  in 
arms  made  him  the  more  jealous  of  a genuine  hero.2  To  me 

1 Tiberius,  indeed,  could  say,  Ann.  ii.  26. : “ se  novies  a divo  Augusto  in 
Germaniam  missum  : ” but  these  missions  were  not  consecutive,  and  some  of 
them  had  been  bloodless : “ plura  consilio  quam  vi  perfecisse.”  Forcible  in 
the  mouth  of  Tiberius,  the  arguments  here  advanced  would  be  still  more  forci- 
ble in  that  of  Domitian. 

2 Tac.  Agric.  89. : “ inerat  conscientia  derisui  fuisse  nuper  falsum  e Ger- 
mania triumphum,  emptis  per  commercia  quorum  habitus  et  crines  in  captivo- 
rum  speciem  formarentur.”  The  reader  will  observe  the  repetition  of  previous 
insinuations  against  the  genuineness  of  the  spoils  of  Caligula.  I am  compelled 
to  express  some  doubt  of  the  statement  that  there  was  any  such  triumph  at 
ail  at  this  time.  Eusebius  in  his  Chronicle  records  one  occasion  of  triumph 
only  under  Domitian  (ad  ann.  91) : “ Domitianus  de  Dacis  et  Germanis  trium- 
phavit.”  Suetonius  says  (c.  6.) : “ de  Chattis  Dacisque  duplicem  triumphum 
egit ; ” still  referring  to  a single  occasion,  though  the  double  solemnity  may 
have  occupied  two  consecutive  days.  The  Dacian  triumph,  which  undoubtedly 
took  place,  as  we  shall  see,  a.  d.  91,  is  alone  referred  to  by  Dion,  and  there  is 
no  trace  of  an  earlier  one  in  the  poets  Martial  and  Statius.  Suetonius,  however, 


60 


HISTORY  OE  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  I).  84. 


it  seems  more  probable  that  tbe  conviction  of  bis  own  prow- 
ess first  gave  him  courage  to  check  the  aspiring  chief,  whom 
he  naturally  apprehended  as  a rival.  In  this,  however,  Do- 
mitian  was  unjust  to  his  lieutenant.  Agricola  yielded  with 
dignified  submission.  He  shrank  from  the  applause  which 
the  people  would  have  lavished  upon  him ; he  accepted,  in- 
deed, respectfully,  the  triumphal  ornaments  proffered  by  hia 
master,  but  he  declined  all  further  advancement  or  employ- 
ment, and  baffled  the  malice  of  his  enemies  by  the  studied 
moderation  of  his  life  and  language  in  the  city.1  For  nine 
years  he  continued  to  enjoy  this  prudent  retirement,  blessed 
in  the  happiness  of  a daughter  married  to  the  high-minded 
Tacitus,  whose  ardent  aspirations  for  an  impracticable  liberty 
he  controlled  by  the  wisdom  of  his  counsels  and  the  living 
force  of  his  example.2 

The  mutual  relations  of  the  barbarian  hordes  beyond  the 
Rhine  and  Danube,  which  began  from  the  second  century  to 

disturb  the  pride,  to  shake  the  power,  and  at 

Attitude  of  the  15  . 1 ’ . 

German  tribes  last  to  threaten  the  existence  of  the  empire, 
towards  Kome.  . . : 

hardly  yet  require  the  attention  of  the  reader  of 
Roman  history.  At  present,  while  the  great  peril  was  con- 
cealed, and  no  anxiety  awakened,  we  may  look  from  the 
Roman  point  of  view  on  the  Germans  and  Dacians,  whose 
hostility  caused  as  yet  only  transient  and  occasional  annoy- 
ance. Claudius  indeed,  on  the  recall  of  Corbulo,  had  drawn 
within  the  Rhine  the  outposts  of  the  Germanian  province. 
Conquest  was  forbidden,  and  the  eyes  of  the  Romans  were 

must  be  in  error  when  he  says  (c.  13.) : “ post  duos  triumphos  Germanici  nomine 
assumpto  ; ” for  the  title  Germanicus  appears  on  the  coins  of  Domitian  from 
the  year  84  downwards.  Eckhel,  vi.  378.  Tacitus  seems  to  have  been  misled 
by  the  assumption  of  this  title  after  the  campaign  of  84. 

1 Tac.  Agric.  40. : “ cultu  modicus,  sermone  facilis,  uno  atque  altero  ami- 
conim  comitatus.” 

2 Tac.  Agric.  42. : “ non  contumacia,  neque  inani  jactatione  libertatis, 
famam  fatumque  provocabat.”  Compare  Corbulo  (Dubois  du  Guchan  Tacile  el 
eon  siecle,  ii.  387.).  The  merit  of  Agricola  appears  very  strongly  on  comparing 
him  with  Corbulo,  who  could  not  keep  within  the  limits  prescribed  to  the  sub- 
ject either  of  a monarchy  or  of  a republic.  Corbulo  might  have  become 
another  Sulla  or  Marius. 


A.  D.  837. j 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


81 


averted  from  the  prospect  of  future  aggrandisement  in  that 
quarter.  If  the  internal  dissensions  of  the  natives  still  oper- 
ated for  the  advancement  of  Roman  interests  among  them, 
the  government  assiduously  disclaimed  all  intention  of  profit- 
ing thereby.  It  received  petitions,  heard  complaints,  recom- 
mended the  redress  of  wrongs  and  giievances,  and  even  arbi- 
trated between  rival  aspirants  to  power  in  their  respective 
communities,  but  it  effectually  checked  the  warlike  ardour 
of  its  lieutenants,  the  most  restless  and  dangerous  class  of 
its  subjects,  by  lavishing  the  triumphal  ornaments,  the  last 
object  of  military  ambition,  on  the  chiefs  who  refrained  from 
war,  and  directed  their  energies  to  works  of  peace  and  meas- 
ures of  public  security.  To  build  a road  or  dig  a canal  might 
entitle  the  Germanian  prefect  to  the  favour  and  honours  for- 
merly reserved  for  a brilliant  foray  or  a gallant  victory.1  It 
is  true  that  the  inactivity  thus  impressed  on  the  command 
of  the  frontier  armies  encouraged  the  barbarians  to  insults 
and  even  outrages  ; but  their  hasty  and  inconsiderate  attacks 
were  easily  baffled  ; their  delinquent  chiefs,  instead  of  being 
punished  by  arms,  were  invited  to  carry  their  complaints  to 
Rome,  and  there,  surrounded  by  all  the  glories  of  imperial 
splendour,  learnt  to  estimate  the  power  of  the  conquering 
race,  and  to  sigh  for  its  luxuries.  When  the  Frisian  envoys 
beheld  in  the  theatre  the  Allies  of  the  Roman  people  seated 
next  to  the  Consuls  and  Senators,  they  turned  away  from  the 
games  and  shows  in  ivhich  they  took  little  interest,  but  ex- 
claimed that  among  the  spectators  of  the  games  there  were 
no  friends  more  devoted  to  Rome  than  the  Germans,  and  in- 
sisted on  receiving  a place  among  the  most  favoured  nations.2 

The  northern  frontier  of  the  empire  was  skirted  by  three 
groups  of  barbarians  : on  the  Rhine  by  the  tribes  of  lower 
Germany,  from  the  Frisii,  on  the  coast,  to  the  Three  groups 
Chatti,  in  Nassau  and  Baden,  some  of  which,  on  tiie  northern 
6uch  as  the  Cherusci  and  others,  were  well  dis-  %weru°n  thc 
posed  to  Rome,  while  the  Chatti  made  them-  thenxster.and 
selves  obnoxious  by  the  eagerness  with  which  tu.  837. 

1 Tac.  Ann.  si.  18-20.  2 Tac.  Ann.  xiii.  14. 


62 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.D.  84. 


they  seized  every  safe  opportunity  of  aggression.  On 
the  Danubius,  or  Upper  Danube,  the  Marcomanni,  for- 
merly the  subjects  of  Maroboduus,  still  retained  a strong 
and  settled  polity,  and  were  controlled  by  a chief  named 
Yannius,  who  was  able  to  maintain  a durable  peace  with 
Rome.  On  the  Ister,  or  Lower  Danube,  we  hear  of  the  rest- 
less hostility  of  the  Mcesians,  a name  which  will  soon  give 
way  to  that  of  the  more  famous  and  more  formidable  Da- 
cians. During  the  insurrection  of  Civilis,  the  Chatti  had 
made  an  inroad  into  the  Roman  province,  and  attempted  to 
seize  Mogirntiacum.  At  the  same  period  Mucianus,  while 
advancing  towards  Italy,  had  been  compelled  to  detach  a 
force  to  repel  an  incursion  of  the  Moesians  into  Thrace. 
Domitian  had  flown  to  defend  the  Rhine,  but  the  foe  had  al- 
ready retreated,  and  it  was  not  thought  necessary  to  pursue 
them.  Eager  to  distinguish  himself  as  a warrior,  he  had  be- 
sought his  father  to  intrust  him  with  another  command  on 
the  frontiers ; but  the  prudent  V espasian  had  maintained  the 
tranquil  policy  of  Claudius,  and  the  young  prince  was  doomed 
to  remain  still  unlaurelled.  Upon  his  accession  to  power  his 
vanity  was  free  to  indulge  itself.  In  the  year  84 
he  placed  himself  at  the  head  of  the  forces  on  the 
Rhine,  and  conducted  an  expedition  against  the 
Chatti.  It  was  a mere  summer  promenade,  in 
which  the  enemy  resorted  to  their  old  tactics 
of  retreat,  and  it  is  probable  that  no  great  engagement  took 
place.  Yet,  the  contempt  with  which  the  campaign  is  treated 
by  some  of  our  authorities  seems  hardly  justified.  One  mili- 
tary writer,  attached  perhaps  to  the  emperor’s  suite,  and 
though  a courtier  by  position,  a man  who  at  least  had  good 
means  of  knowing  the  circumstances,  speaks  of  it  with  warm 
but  not  overweening  applause.  The  Germans  were  indeed 
always  ready  to  accede  to  moderate  demands  of  slaves  or 
tribute  exacted  from  them  as  the  price  of  withdrawal,  and 
the  treaty  concluded  with  the  Chatti  by  Domitian  is  no 
proof  of  a brilliant  success.  But  the  weight  of  the  emperor’s 
sword  is  rather  to  be  traced  in  the  tranquillity  which  con- 


Domitian  leads 
an  expedition 
against  the 
Chatti* 

a.  d.  84. 
a.  u.  837. 


A U.  637.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


83 


timied  to  reign  in  this  quarter,  and  in  the  Romanized  popu- 
lation spread  throughout  the  contiguous  districts,  which 
enabled  Trajan,  a few  years  later,  to  annex  them  permanently 
to  the  empire.1 

Domitian  hastened  hack  to  Rome,  and  no  doubt  vaunted 
his  prowess  to  the  utmost.  The  people  applauded  ; the  sol- 
diers, gratified  with  an  addition  to  their  pay,  D0mitian 
shouted  behind  him  as  he  entered  the  city,  and  tor™andasi 
shook  their  formidable  weapons  ; the  poets  nj^cVfGer- 
chanted  their  elaborate  compliments  ; here  and  mamcus- 
there  only  a whisper  or  a placard  hinted  that  the  victory 
was  a lie,  the' show  an  imposture,  the  captives  bought  or  bor- 
rowed for  the  occasion.2  Domitian  wanted  magnanimity  to 
despise  these  cavils,  even  if  he  knew  them  to  be  undeserved. 
But  he  now  felt  himself  strong  in  the  favour  of  the  army, 
which  he  had  led  to  the  Capitol,  and  he  could  venture  to  re- 
call the  brave  lieutenant  •whose  exploits  transcended  his  own. 
He  had  gained  a victory  over  Agricola  and  his  other  cap- 
tains, worth  many  victories  over  the  enemies  of  Rome.  He 
assumed  himself  the  surname  of  Germanicus ; he  imposed 
this  designation  upon  the  month  of  September ; but  these 
empty  titles  added  little  to  the  complacency  with  which  he 
felt  that  he  was  now  the  Chief  of  his  own  armies,  now  an 
Emperor  indeed.3 

1 For  the  expedition  against  the  Chatti,  see  Suet.  Domit.  6. ; Dion,  lxvii.  4. 
These  writers  treat  it  with  the  utmost  contempt.  On  the  other  hand  comp. 
Frontinus,  Stratagem,  i.  1.  8.,  ii.  11.  7. ; Stat.  Sylv.  L 4.  89.,  iii.  3.  168. : 
“ victis  parcentia  fcedera  Chattis.” 

2 See  a preceding  note  on  the  triumph  erroneously,  as  it  would  seem,  as- 
cribed to  Domitian  by  Tacitus.  The  solemn  entry  of  the  emperor  into  Rome, 
after  a victorious  expedition,  might  bear  the  appearance,  and  perhaps  attain, 
in  loose  language,  the  name  of  a triumph,  without  having  any  legitimate  claim 
to  it.  Pliny  refers  to  a later  triumph  over  the  Dacians  (see  below)  when  he 
contrasts  with  it  the  genuine  honours  of  Trajan : “ accipiet  aliquando  Capito- 
lium  non  mimicos  currus,  nec  falsa  simulacra  victoria;”  see  Panegyr.  16.  17. 
The  imputation  of  fictitious  trophies  seems  to  have  been  as  common  as  it  was 
easy. 

3 Martial,  ix.  2. : “ Dum  Janus  hiemes,  Domitianus  auctumnos. 

Augustus  annis  commodabit  {estates : 


84 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  84 


The  senate  next  decreed  that  Domitian  should  he  per- 
petual censor,  and  encouraged  him  to  assume  the  consul- 
ship year  after  year  successively.  He  had  now  repaired 
the  damage  inflicted  on  the  Capitol  by  the  recent  fire,  and 
completed  the  restoration,  of  the  most  august  of  the  Roman 
temples.  But  the  treasures  of  Vespasian  had  already  melted 
away  in  the  hands  of  the  liberal  Titus  ; costly  wars  and  bar- 
ren triumphs  had  drained  perhaps  to  the  last  sesterce  the 
Domitian  is  coffers  of  the  empire  ; the  day,  fatal  to  despots, 
money^ and  had  arrived,  when  the  revenues  of  the  state 

ser?es'ofCcon-  could  no  longer  meet  its  expenditure.  The  peace 
fiscations.  which  Domitian  had  patched  up  in  Germany,  and 
imposed  upon  his  lieutenants  in  Britain,  might  relieve  the 
military  chest  in  those  quarters,  but  the  increase  of  pay  which 
the  soldiers  had  extorted  must  at  least  have  balanced  this  re- 
duction. His  attempt  to  reduce  the  numbers  of  the  soldiery 
produced  both  alarm  and  peril,  and  seems  to  have  been 
abandoned  as  impolitic  or  impracticable.1  The  means  of 
raising  fresh  supplies  for  his  personal  extravagance,  or  for 
the  shows  and  largesses  which  the  people  unceasingly  de- 
manded, were  unfortunately  too  obvious.  The  emperor 
readily  listened  to  the  insinuations  of  his  freedmen  and  flat- 
terers. The  noblest  and  wealthiest  of  his  subjects  were  de- 
nounced as  disaffected  and  dangerous.  Already,  in  his  third 
year  of  power,  Domitian  allowed  himself  to  be  seduced  into 
the  path  of  proscriptions  and  confiscations,  and  the  senate 
shuddered  at  the  apparation  of  a new  Hero  or  Caligula.3 


Hum  grande  famuli  nomen  asseret  Rheni, 

Germanicarum  magna  lux  Calendarum.” 

The  assumption  of  this  title  was  already  known  on  the  Nile  in  December, 
as  appears  from  an  inscription  scratched  on  the  statue  of  Memnon  : “ Sextus 
Licinius  Pudens  legionis  xxii.  xi.  kal.  Januarias  anno  nil.  D(omini)  N(ostri) 
Domitiani  Csesaris  Aug.  Germanici  audi  Memnonem;”  Orelli,  Inscript,  i.  621. 
The  fourth  year  of  Domitian  commenced  in  Sept.  84. 

1 Suet.  Domit.  12. 

a Euseb.  Chron.  ann.  2099,  Domitiani  3.  (from  Oct.  83) : “ Domitianua 
nobiles  multos  relegavit  et  occidit.”  Clinton,  F.  R.,  sub  ann.  84.  Comp 


A.  U.  837.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE, 


85 


The  people  witnessed  with  indifference  the  terror  of  the 
great,  while  they  applauded  the  establishment  of  the  Capi- 
toline  games,  which  were  founded,  in  fact,  on  the  ruins  of  the 
most  illustrious  Roman  houses.1 

The  prostration  of  the  imperial  finances  was  soon  appar- 
ent in  the  inability  of  the  government  to  interfere  for  the 
protection  of  its  clients  and  suppliants  in  Ger- 

L , ± A Domitian  re- 

many.  Rome  had  recently  given  a prince  to  the  frains  from  fur- 

J J , . 1 . ther  interfer- 

(Jherusci ; but  the  nation  had  risen  against  a enee  in  Ger- 
nominee  bred  in  a foreign  city,  the  son  of  a chief  1 
who  had  demeaned  himself  by  taking  the  name  of  Italicus, 
and  they  had  thrown  themselves  upon  the  protection  of  the 
Chatti.  In  another  quarter  the  Quadi  and  Marcomanni,  who 
had  also  allowed  Rome  to  nominate  their  ruler,  found  them- 
selves attacked  by  the  Lygii  and  Hermunduri,  tribes  of  the 
interior.  They  appealed  to  the  emperor  for  support ; but, 
instead  of  armed  legions,  he  sent  them  a deputation  of  a hun- 
dred knights  with  presents  and  promises.2  Domitian  well 
understood  the  true  interest  of  his  government,  and  he  was 
disposed  to  look  calmly  on  while  the  Germans  fought  out 
among  themselves  their  private  quarrels.  Rome  had  sur- 
rounded the  borders  of  her  empire  with  a zone  of  half- 
reclaimed  barbarians,  but  the  cries  of  these  dependents  for 
assistance  revealed  the  existence  beyond  them  of  another 
zone,  far  broader,  of  wholly  unbroken  communities  whose 
names  had  not  yet  been  bruited  in  Italy.  The  Hermunduri 
contended  with  the  Chatti  for  the  salt  mines  on  the  river 
Saale,  in  the  very  heart  of  Germany : the  Chamavi  and  An- 
grivarii,  which  last  may  be  placed  in  the  district  of  Osnaburg, 
attacked  the  Bructeri  on  the  Lippe.  Sixty  thousand  of  this 

Oros.  vii.  10. : “ nobilissimos  e Senatu  invidise  simul  et  pradse  causa 

interfecit,”  &c. 

1 Juvenal,  iv.  in  fin. : “ Lamiarum  caede  madenti.”  The  head  of  this 
wealthy  house,  the  former  husband  of  Domitia,  was  sacrificed  about  this  period 
to  the  cupidity  rather  than  to  the  jealousy  of  Domitian. 

2 Dion,  lxvii.  5. ; Plin.  Hist.  Nat.  iv.  28. : “ regnum  Yannianum ; ” from 
Vannius,  king  of  the  Quadi  and  Marcomanni,  who  succeeded  through  Roman 
influence  to  Maroboauus  and  Catualda. 


S6 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  84 


nation,  says  Tacitus  exultingly,  were  slain,  by  the  hands,  not 
of  Romans,  but  of  their  own  countrymen,  for  the  benefit  of 
the  Romans,  which  is  still  more  gratifying  • and  the  tribe, 
he  adds,  was  utterly  annihilated.  The  philosophic  historian 
was  sanguine  in  his  patriotism.  The  name  of  the  Bructeri 
reappears  at  intervals  in  the  annals  of  border  warfare,  and 
even  in  the  fifth  century  retains  a place  among  the  German 
tribes  enumerated  by  Claudian,  all  of  whom,  no  doubt, 
clutched  their  share  of  the  spoils  of  the  falling  empire.1 

In  one  quarter  of  the  Northern  world,  however,  it  was  im- 
possible to  retain  this  indifferent  attitude.  Twice  already 
have  the  Dacians  come  before  us  as  a restless 

Hostile  atti 

tude  of  the  people,  who  troubled  the  Roman  provinces  on  the 
lower  Danube.  In  the  latter  years  of  Tiberius 
they  had  burst  into  Pannonia,  and  the  weary  or  timid  empe- 
ror had  made  no  vigorous  effort  to  restrain  them.2  Again, 
in  the  heat  of  the  late  civil  wars,  they  had  watched  the  mo- 
ment Avhen  the  strength  of  the  legions  had  been  withdrawn 
from  Moesia,  and  crossing  the  frontier  stream,  had  swept  away 
the  slender  outposts  of  the  empire,  and  threatened  to  storm 
the  head  quarters  of  the  provincial  government.  The  fortu- 
nate turn  of  Vespasian’s  affairs  in  Italy  allowed  Mucianus  to 
detach  one  legion,  the  Sixth,  from  the  forces  he  was  himself 
bringing  up  from  the  East ; and  with  this  brigade,  reinforced 
shortly  afterwards  by  some  battalions  from  the  army  of  Vi- 
tellius,  Eonteius  Agrippa  recovered  the  province,  and  drove 
the  barbarians  beyond  the  Ister.3  Dion  considers,  probably 

1 “ Pulsis  Bructeris  et  penitus  excisis  vicinarum  consensu  nationum.”  Tat 
Germ.  83.  The  date  of  the  event  referred  to  is  not  given.  The  book  De 
Monbus  Germ,  is  supposed  to  have  been  written  a.  n.  99,  the  third  year  of 
Trajan.  In  the  early  part  of  this  reign  Spurinna  is  said  to  have  gained  a 
victory  over  the  Bructeri.  Plin.  Ep.  ii.  6.  This  nation  finds  a place  too  in 
the  Peutinger  Table  of  the  third  century.  Comp,  also  Claudian,  viii.  451. : 
“accola  sylvae  Bructerus  Hercynias.”  Greenwood,  Hist,  of  the  Germans , i.  ITS. 
note.  See  also  Bede,  Hist.  Eccles.  v.  10. : “ Antiqui  Saxones  Boructuarii  . . . 
paganis  adhuc  ritibus  servientes.” 

2 Suet.  Oct.  21. ; Tib.  41. 

s Tac.  Hist.  iii.  46. 


A.  U.  837.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


87 


with  justice,  that  the  inhabitants  of  both  banks  of  the  Ister 
were  homogeneous,  and  that  the  people  whom  the  Romans 
designated  as  Dacians  were  known  to  the  Greeks  by  the  ap- 
pellation of  Getse.  Popularly,  however,  the  former  name  is 
given  to  the  tribes  beyond  the  river,  the  latter  to  those  with- 
in it ; the  one  were  the  enemies  and  invaders,  the  others  the 
subjects  and  provincials  of  the  empire.  Stretching  from  the 
Theiss  to  the  Euxine,  these  tribes,  though  known  by  one  gen- 
eric name,  formed  a confederation  of  various  communities. 
They  had  apparently  a common  capital,  or  temple,  or  place 
of  assembly  in  the  mountain  fastnesses  of  Transylvania,  from 
whence  their  broad  territories  gently  sloped  in  every  direc- 
tion and  the  chief  to  whom  they  gave  the  command  of  their 
warlike  expeditions  was  distinguished  by  the  title,  rather 
than  the  personal  appellation,  of  Decebalus,  or  the  Strength 
of  the  Dacians? 

The  appellations,  indeed,  of  the  barbarian  chiefs  who  flit 
from  time  to  time  across  the  stage  in  contest  with  the  Ro- 
mans have  but  little  interest  for  us  ; for  we  can  Domitian’s 
assign  neither  distinctive  meaning  to  the  names,  aSststhe 
nor  character  to  the  men  who  bore  them.  It 
would  seem  that  the  headship  of  the  Dacian  tribes  A- u- 839_m 
was  relinquished  at  this  time  by  a king  called  Duras  to  an- 
other known  to  ns  by  the  name  of  Diarpaneus,  and  it  is  possi- 
ble that  this  last  was  the  same  whom  we  shall  meet  with 
again  under  the  title  of  Decebalus,  in  long  sustained  conflict 
with  a later  emperor.  In  the  first  year  of  Domitian,  this  war- 

! Of  the  locality  more  will  be  said  hereafter  ; but  the  allusions  in  Statius 
refer  to  the  custom  of  the  Dacians  as  known  in  Domitian’s  time.  Theb.  i.  20.  • 
“Et  conjurato  dejectos  vertice  Dacos  ; ” Sylv.  i.  1.  7. : “attoniti  vidit  domus 
ardua  Daci ; ” ib.  80. : “ tu  tardum  in  foedera  montem  Longa  pace  domas  ; ” 
iii.  3.  169. : “ Quseque  suum  Dacis  donat  dementia  montem.” 

2 Leo,  the  great  Sanscrit  scholar,  explains  Decebalus  by  the  Sanscrit 
DhAvaka-bala,  Dacorum  robur,  and  Diurpaneus  by  Durpana,  validam  manum 
habens.  See  Imhof,  Domitianm,  p.  55.  Dr.  Latham  derives  the  Dacians  from 
the  Scythians,  and  discovers  the  name  of  Decebalus  in  Dizabulus,  the  first 
recorded  king  of  the  Turks.  Bergmann  ( Les  Geies,  p.  40.)  refers  it  to  Dakh. 
yalhus,  Scythian  words,  which  he  interprets  Faucon  diurne. 


88 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  86. 


rior  had  ventured  to  cross  the  Danube  and  invade  the  Mcesian 
province ; he  routed  a legion  with  the  loss  of  its  eagle,  slew 
the  praetor  Oppius  Sabinus,  stormed  and  sacked  many  towns, 
and  ravaged  the  Roman  territory  to  the  foot  of  the  Haem  us. 
Strong  measures  were  required  to  recover  and  secure  the 
province.  Numerous  levies  were  to  be  raised,  abundant 
supplies  were  to  be  collected.  War  against  the  savage  races 
of  the  Danube  could  not  be  made  self-supporting.  While 
Domitian,  just  returned  from  his  dubious  successes  on  the 
Rhine,  was  courting  the  applause  of  the  citizens  and  bribing 
the  soldiers  to  fidelity,  his  preparations  for  a second  expedi- 
tion, more  important  and  more  dangerous  than  the  first,  were 
being  urged  forward  in  Italy,  Illyricum,  and  Macedonia.  In 
the  spring  of  86  all  was  ready  for  the  emperor’s  descent  upon 
the  scene  of  action  in  person.  He  dared  not  intrust  the  com- 
mand of  his  forces  to  the  brave  captain  he  had  lately  humili- 
ated; but  in  Cornelius  Fuscus,  prefect  of  the  praetorians,  he 
possessed  at  least  a faithful  adherent  of  moderate  ability, 
whom  he  could  place  at  the  head  of  his  armies  while  he  loi- 
tered himself  in  indolence  at  a frontier  station.  The  Dacian 
chief  had  trained  his  followers  in  the  Roman  tactics,  and  ut- 
terly despised  the  adversary  who  now  marched  against  him. 
He  is  said  to  have  tauntingly  required,  as  the  price  of  peace, 
a poll-tax  on  the  head  of  every  Roman  citizen.  Nor  were 
these  arrogant  pretensions  unsupported  by  valour  and  con- 
duct in  the  field.  Withdrawing  from  the  plains  of  Moesia  he 
enticed  Fuscus  to  cross  the  Danube  and  follow 

Defeat  and 

death  of  Cor-  his  retreating  forces,  till  he  could  close  on  him 

nelius  Fuscub,  . 

a.  d.  87.  with  advantage.  I he  operations  of  the  retreat 
and  pursuit  may  have  occupied  some  time,  and 
we  have  no  acquaintance  with  the  particulars;  but  they  end- 
ed in  the  complete  defeat  and  rout  of  the  Romans,  with  the 
loss  of  at  least  one  legion  and  eagle,  and  the  death  of  their 
commander.1 

1 Suet.  Domit.  6. ; Juvenal,  iv.  112.;  Martial,  vi.  '?6.  The  death  of  Fuscus 
may  be  placed  in  the  year  87  (840).  The  loss  of  the  Romans  was  supposed  to 
have  been  very  great,  but  Tacitus,  in  relating  these  events,  declared  that  it  was 


A.  U.  839.1 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


89 


The  luxury  and  frivolity  in  which  Domitian  indulged  ia 
the  conduct  of  this  campaign  are  noted  by  the  unfriendly 
hand  of  the  younger  Pliny.  It  was  particularly  asserted 
that  he  caused  himself  to  he  towed  on  his  progress  up  or 
down  the  great  rivers  of  Pannonia,  to  avoid  the  dissonant 
noise  of  oars.1  However  this  maybe,  he  seems  to  have  taken 
no  active  part  in  the  perils  of  the  expedition,  and  soon  quit- 
ted it  for  Rome,  where  he  was  persecuting  the  senate  and  the 
people,  while  his  lieutenant  was  penetrating  into  the  Dacian 
fastnesses  and  perishing  sword  in  hand.3  The  dis- 
grace  of  this  defeat  was,  however,  retrieved  by  a subsequent 

. , . , . . _ . , J success. 

considerable  victory  gamed  m a subsequent  cam- 
paign by  Julianus,  who  encountered  the  enemy  also  on  his 
own  soil  at  a place  named  Tap®,  the  site  of  which  is  not 
ascertained.3  Decebalus,  it  is  said,  saved  himself  from  de- 
struction by  the  stratagem  of  cutting  down  a forest  to  the 
height  of  the  human  figure,  and  clothing  the  stumps  of  the 
trees  in  armour,  which  deterred  the  Romans  from  advancing 
to  complete  their  victory.  Domitian  was  encouraged  perhaps 
by  this  turn  of  fortune  to  leave  Rome  again  for  the  frontiers, 
and  even  to  advance  in  person  against  the  Marcomanni,  the 
Quadi,  and  the  Sarmatians.4  These  tribes,  it  seems,  had 
failed  to  furnish  Rome  Avith  the  supplies  she  had  demanded 
of  them.  They  were  now  chastised  for  them  neglect.  Domi- 
tian satisfied  himself  that  he  had  made  the  necessary  impres- 

the  duty  of  a good  citizen  to  conceal  the  numbers  of  the  slain.  The  lost  books 
of  the  Histories  were  known  to  Orosius,  who  has  preserved  this  incident  (vii, 
10.) : “ Corn.  Tacitus,  qui  banc  historiam  diligentissime  contexuit,  de  reticendo 
interfectorum  numero,  et  Sallustium  Crispum,  et  alios  auctores  quam  plurimos 
sanxisse,  et  seipsum  potissimum  elegisse  dicit.” 

1 Plin.  Paneg.  82. ; Dion,  lxvii.  6. 

2 Oros.  vii.  10. : “ cum  et  in  urbe  senatum  populumque  laniaret,  et  foris 
male  circumactum  exercitum  assidua  hostes  clade  conficerent.”  The  secular 
games  followed  in  88,  and  this  was  perhaps  the  year  of  the  victory  of  Julianus. 

3 Julianus  (Titius,  Tertius  or  Tettius?)  had  been  mentioned  before  by 
Tacitus  as  an  able  commander  in  Moesia.  Hist.  i.  T9. ; ii,  85. ; iv.  39,  40. 

4 These  names  indicate,  respectively,  the  tribes  of  the  modern  Bohemia, 
Moravia,  and  North-Western  Hungary. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


90 


[A.  D.  90 


sion ; though  Tacitus  would  lead  us  to  believe  that  here  too 
the  Roman  arms  met  with  some  bloody  reverses.1 * 

Meanwhile  Julianus  continued  to  press  on  the  discomfited 
enemy,  and  Decebalus,  we  are  assured,  made  many  applica 
Peace  with  the  ti°ns  f°r  peace  before  the  emperor  thought  fit  to 
Dacians.  declare  the  terms  on  which  he  would  be  content 
to  grant  it.  Such  perhaps  were  the  fictions  with  which  Ro- 
mon  vanity  glossed  over  the  disgrace  of  consenting,  while 
the  frontier  of  the  empire  received  no  extension,  to  make 
presents,  or  more  truly,  to  pay  tribute  to  a worsted  enemy.3 
Still  deeper  was  the  disgrace,  though  little  felt  perhaps  at 
the  time,  that  Decebalus  should  not  venture  to  put  himself 
in  the  hands  of  the  Roman  emperor,  but  should  send  a vassal 
to  conduct  the  treaty  for  him.  Domitian  flattered  the  pride 
of  the  soldiers  by  pretending  to  place  a crown  on  the  head 
of  this  envoy.s  He  then  sheathed  his  sword,  and  returned  as 
a victor  to  his  capital,  where  the  people  were  prepared,  as 
before,  to  receive  him  with  acclamations,  the  poets  to  chant 
his  glories,  the  senate  to  prostrate  itself  in  servile  assenta- 
tion.4 * He  claimed  a triumph  for  his  lieutenant’s  victories 
over  the  Dacians,  and  celebrated  conjointly  with  them  his 
own  successes  in  Germany ; but  for  the  more  doubtful  laurels 
he  had  gained  in  Sarmatia,  he  was  content  to  demand  the  in- 
ferior honour  of  an  ovation.6  He  decreed  that  October,  the 
month  of  his  own  birth,  should  henceforth  be  styled  Domiti- 


1 Tac.  Agric.  41.,  summing  up  the  disasters  of  Domitian’s  reign:  “tot 
exercitus  in  Mresia  Daciaque  et  Germania  Pannoniaque  . . . amissi.”  So  Eu- 
trop.  vii.  23. : “ in  Sarmatia  legio  ejus  cum  duce  interfecta.”  Martial  combines 
the  Sarmatian  with  the  Dacian  campaigns,  ix.  102  : 

“ Cornua  Sarmatici  ter  perfida  contudit  Istri, 

Sudantem  Geticd,  ter  nive  lavit  equum.” 

J Plin.  Pancg.  11,  12. ; Dion,  Ixviii.  6.  9. 
s Dion,  lxyii,  l7. ; Martial,  v.  3. 

4 The  peace  with  the  Dacians  was  concluded  in  December  90,  about  the 

time  of  the  Saturnalia:  Comp.  Martial,  vii.  80,  91,  95.  (Imhof,  p.  65.),  and 
Domitian  returned  to  Rome  in  Jan.  91.  Martial,  viii.  8.  The  triumph  may  b« 
placed  in  this  year,  in  the  consulship  of  Ulpius  Trajanus  and  Acilius  Glabrio. 

6 Euseb.  ad  ann.  91 : “ Domitianus  de  Dacis  et  Germanis  triumphavit.’1 


A.  U.  843.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


91 


anus.1  He  erected  an  arch,  long  since  overthrown,  hut  which 
rivalled  in  its  day  the  Flavian  arch  on  the  Velia,  near  the 
gate  of  Triumph  and  the  temple  of  Returning  F ortune.2  The 
city, — all  the  world,  savs  Dion, — was  filled  with 

J Triumphal 

statues  ot  the  glorious  emperor,  and  the  (Japitol  arch,  and  other 

, . r . ....  monuments  of 

was  adorned  with  many  such  images  m gilt  bronze.  Domitian’s 
The  citizens,  anxious  to  possess  themselves  of 
such  brilliant  portraits  of  their  favourite  hero,  were  forbid- 
den to  make  their  golden  statues  of  less  than  a certain  speci- 
fied weight.  But  of  all  these  effigies  the  most  w , . . 
magnificent  was  the  equestrian  colossus  in  gilt  col°ssus. 
bronze,  erected  in  the  centre  of  the  forum,  before  the  shrine 
of  the  Flavian  family.  Planted  on  a lofty  pedestal,  from 
which  his  head  might  be  said,  in  poetic  language,  to  pierce 
the  sky,  and  shining  down  upon  the  glowing  roofs  of  halls 
and  temples,  Domitian  sate  with  his  right  hand  advanced  in 
the  attitude  of  command,  and  bearing  in  his  left  a figure  of 
Minerva,  his  sword  reposing  peacefully  in  its  scabbard,  while 

Suet.  Domit.  6. : “ de  Sarmatis  lauream  modo  Capitolino  Jovi  intulit.”  Of. 
Eutrop.  vii.  23. ; Martial,  viii.  15. ; Stat  Sylv.  iii.  3.  168. 

“ Haec  est  quae  victis  parcentia  foedera  Chattis, 

Quasque  suum  Dacis  donat  dementia  montem  : 

Quae  modo  Marcomanos  post  horrida  bella  vagosque 
Sauromatas  Latio  non  est  dignata  triumpho.” 

It  is  commonly  said  that  Domitian  assumed  the  title  of  Dacieus  in  addition 
to  that  of  Germanicus.  The  former  title,  however,  does  not  appear  on  his 
coins,  as  is  the  case  with  the  latter  repeatedly,  from  84  downwards.  The  line 
of  Juvenal,  vi.  205. : “ Dacicus  et  scripto  radiat  Germanicus  auro,”  refers  more 
probably  to  Trajan.  On  the  other  hand,  Martial’s  eighth  book  is  dedicated 
Imp.  Domitiano  Caes.  Aug.  Germ.  Dacico. 

1 Suet.  Domit.  13.  September  13  was  the  date  of  his  acoession,  October  24 
of  his  birth.  Comp.  Macrob.  Saturn,  i.  12. ; Stat.  Sylv.  iv.  1.  42. 

“ Nondum  omnis  honorem 

Annus  habet,  cupiuntque  deem  tua  nomina  menses.” 

3 According  to  Suetonius,  Domitian  erected  so  many  Jani  (small  double 
arches)  and  other  arches  to  his  own  honour,  that  some  one  at  last  scratched 
upon  them  the  word  ap/cei,  Enough!  For  the  triumphal  arch  and  the  adjacent 
temple  see  a spirited  epigram  of  Martial,  viii.  65. 


92 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMAN'S 


| A.  D.  91 


his  prancing  war-horse  trampled  on  the  forehead  of  the  cap 
tive  Rhine.1  We  could  have  wished  that  the  gorgeous 
verses  of  Statius  had  been  addressed  to  a worthier  object,  and 
one  which  might  have  deserved  a longer  term  of  existence. 
But  horse  and  rider  were  soon  rolled  in  the  dust,  and  our 
notion  of  one  of  the  proudest  works  of  art  at  Rome  must  be 
gathered  by  a comparison  of  the  poet’s  laboured  description 
with  the  existing  statue  of  Aurelius,  to  which  it  seems  to 
have  borne  a remarkable  resemblance.2 

Our  historians  insinuate  that  the  glories  of  Domitian’s 
triumph  were,  after  all,  but  borrowed  plumes ; that,  in  de- 
fault of  the  glittering  spoils  which  had  been  so 

Triumph  and  ° D 1 

shows  of  Do-  often  borne  to  the  Capitol,  he  had  caused  the  fur- 
niture of  his  own  palaces  to  be  paraded  before 
him ; and  the  same  tradition  seems  to  be  preserved  in  the 
sneer  of  Tacitus  at  the  pretended  captives  from  the  Rhine. 
This  is  a mere  repetition  of  the  stories  afloat  on  the  occasion 
of  Caligula’s  mock  triumph,  and  history  which  repeats  itself 
is  justly  suspected.  But,  however  scanty  were  the  trophies 
of  the  Germanic  and  Dacic  wars,  the  people  demanded  shows 

1 Statius,  Si/lv.  i.  1. 

“ Qua3  superimposito  moles  geminata  colosso 
Stat  Latium  complexa  forum  ? . . . . 

Ipse  autem  puro  celsurn  caput  aere  septus 

Templa  superfulges  ? 

Dextra  vetat  pugnas ; Icevam  Tritonia  virgo 
Non  gravat,  et  sectse  prastendit  colla  Medusae  . . . 

It  tergo  demissa  chlamys : latus  ease  quieto 
Seeurum  . . . vacute  pro  respite  terrse 
iErea  captivi  crinem  terit  ungula  Rheni.” 

The  statue  seems  to  have  been  raised  on  a lofty  pedestal,  and  it  was  placed 
on  the  site  of  the  Curtian  pool  of  the  early  forum,  possibly  on  the  exact  spot 
where  the  column  of  Phocas,  erected  five  centuries  later,  still  stands. 

2 The  lines  above  selected  from  the  description  of  Statius  may  show  the 
points  of  resemblance  and  difference.  The  attitude  of  the  two  riders  is  the 
same ; in  both  the  right  hand  is  advanced  unarmed.  From  the  position  of  the 
left  hand  of  Aurelius,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  it  held  the  Palladium.  But 
Aurelius  nas  no  sword  by  his  side,  and  his  steed  does  not  appear  to  have 
trodden  on  a captive  enemy. 


k.  U.  844.  j 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


93 


and  games  in  increasing  profusion,  and  the  emperor  was  com- 
pelled to  plunder  Ms  own  subjects  to  satisfy  their  rapacity. 
Large  gifts,  under  the  name  of  coronary  gold,  were  required 
from  every  province  and  city,  to  bribe  the  soldiers  and  gorge 
the  citizens.1 2 * *  All  the  nobility  of  Rome  feasted  with  their 
ruler  at  an  enormous  banquet.  The  victor  in  a sterile  cam- 
paign against  the  public  enemy  levied  his  exactions  on  nobles 
and  provincials,  and  amidst  all  the  exultations  of  his  flatterers 
indications  are  not  wanting,  that  the  despot  had  now  plung- 
ed with  little  restraint  into  a systematic  career  of  violence 
and  bloodshed.5 

During  the  progress  of  these  distant  wars  Doinitian  had 
been  disturbed,  though  only  for  a moment,  by  the  appearance 
of  a pretended  N ero,  who  threw  himself  on  the 

r.  i-  . . . Appearance  of 

support  of  the  king  of  PartMa,  n he  was  not  in  apretended 

fact  set  up  by  the  Parthians  to  annoy  the  chief  a.’d.  S9. 
of  the  rival  empire.  This  event  occurred  per- 
haps in  89,  when  the  forces  of  the  Roman  government  were 
fully  occupied  with  their  operations  against  the  Dacians ; 
nevertheless  Domitian  assumed  a high  tone,  and  demanded 
the  surrender  of  the  adventurer.  War  was  threatened,  and 
the  note  of  preparation  already  sounded.  When  Tiridates 
promptly  obeyed  the  summons,  the  court  poets  declared  that 
their  master  had  conquered  the  PartMans,  and  chanted  their 
pagan  over  the  baffled  nations  of  the  East.  The  Romans 
were  at  last  disabused  of  the  imposture  regarding  their  late 

1 The  triumph  was  an  opportunity  for  demanding  large  sums  from  the 
provinces  under  the  name  of  “ aurum  coronarium.”  Compare,  for  the  extor- 
tion of  Domitian,  Plin.  Paneg.  17.  41.  The  great  banquet  is  celebrated  by 
Martial,  viii.  50.:  “Yescitur  omnis  eques  tecum,  populusque,  patresque,  Et 
eapit  ambrosias  cum  duce  Roma  dapes ; ” and  by  Statius,  Sylv.  iv.  2.,  who 
speaks  of  himself  as  a guest,  and  assures  us  that  this  immense  concourse  of 
citizens, — “ Romuleos  proceres  trabeataque  Csesar  Agmina  mille  simul  j'ussit 
discumbere  mensis,” — was  entertained  under  the  roof  of  the  vast  imperial 
palace ; “ tantum  domino  minor.” 

2 Orosius,  1.  c.  Domitian  seems  to  have  laid  his  hands  on  the  funds  of 

public  institutions.  Frontinus,  de  Aqucedud.  118.  See  Marquardt,  (Becker’s) 

AUerthum.  iii.  3.  p.  86.  note. 


94 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  91. 


tyrant,  which  had  so  long  floated  before  their  eyes  ; but  the 
fable  survived,  as  has  been  already  mentioned,  among  the 
Jews  and  Christians,  for  many  generations  after  the  fall  of 
the  Flavian  dynasty.1  A revolt  among  the  Nasamones  in 
Numidia,  caused  by  some  fiscal  oppression,  demanded  that 
the  sword  of  Domitian  should  be  drawn  once  more  in  the 
third  quarter  of  the  globe.  The  insurgents  stormed  a Roman 
camp,  made  themselves  drunk,  and  were  cut  in  pieces  by  the 
praetor  Flaccus.  The  emperor  wrote  boastfully  to  the  senate 
announcing,  in  the  haughty  language  of  divinity,  that  he  had 
forbidden  the  Nasamones  to  exist.2 3 * * * *  Once  more  the  poets 
profited  by  the  occasion : once  more  Silius  emulated  the 
lofty  flights  of  Yirgil,  and  declared  that  to  his  patron,  as  to 
Augustus,  the  tribes  of  Canges  tendered  their  slackened 
bows,  the  Bactrians  offered  their  emptied  quivers.  Again 
the  exploits  of  a Roman  emperor  were  likened  to  the  triumph- 
ant progress  of  Hercules  and  Bacchus.  The  sources  of  the 
Nile,  the  summits  of  Atlas,  were  at  last  surmounted  ; the 
sun  and  stars  were  left  behind  in  the  panting  i-ace.8 

The  Dacian  triumph,  and  the  acts  of  tyranny  which  accom 
panied  it,  seem  to  have  been  quickly  followed  by  a military 


1 Reimar,  on  Dion,  Ixiv.  9.,  enumerates  the  false  Neros — 1.  A slave  who 

raised  a sedition,  in  Pontus.  and  was  slain  by  Asprenas  during  the  reign  of 
Otho  ; Tac.  Hist.  ii.  8. ; Dion,  1.  c.  2.  A man  whose  real  name  was  Terentius 
Maximus,  who  appeared  also  in  Asia;  Zonar.  xi.  18.  3.  The  pretender  of 

whom  we  are  now  speaking,  mentioned  by  Suetonius,  Her.  57.,  as  appearing 
twenty  years  after  Nero’s  death,  i.  e.  in  89. 

2 Zonar.  Annal.  xi.  19.  N ana/iavag  hi&Xvoa  elvai. 

3 Sil.  Ital.  iii.  612. : 

“ Huic  laxos  arcus  olim  Gangetica  pubes 
Submittet,  vacuasque  ostendent  Bactra  pharetras ; 

Hie  et  ab  Arctoo  currus  aget  axe  per  urbem, 

Ducet  et  Eoos,  Baccho  cedente,  triumphos,” 

Slat.  Syh.  iii.  154. : 

“ Nunc  magnos  Oriens  dabit  triumphos. 

Ibis  quo  vagus  Hercules  et  Evan 
Ultra  sidera,  flammeumque  solem, 

Et  Nili  caput  et  nives  Atlantis.” 


A.  U.  844.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


95 


insurrection,  to  which  indeed  they  may  have  main-  ^ 

ly  conduced.  When  an  obscure  soldier,  such  as  tomns  satumi- 
Vitellius  or  Vespasian,  revolted  against  the  reign-  1.  d.  93. 

ing  emperor,  we  may  conclude  him  to  have  been 
the  instrument  of  the  legions  or  their  officers  in  the  provinces 
in  which  the  revolt  arose  ; but  when,  as  in  some  less  conspic- 
uous instances,  a man  of  high  family  and  great  connexions 
raised  the  standard  of  insurrection,  it  is  fair  to  infer  that  he 
was  instigated  by  sympathy  with  the  oppressed  class  to 
which  he  personally  belonged,  and  rather  led  the  legions 
than  was  impelled  by  them.  L.  Antonius  Saturninus  com- 
manded the  Roman  forces  in  the  Upper  Germany.1 *  He  was 
proud  of  his  descent,  in  which  he  united  two  of  the  great 
houses  of  the  republic,  and  of  a name  which  might  revive 
recollections  both  of  a powerful  triumvir  and  of  a popular 
tribune.3  He  might  claim  respect  from  the  nobles  as  well  as 
favour  from  the  people  ; and  when  the  cry  of  the  persecuted 
senators  reached  him  on  his  prsetorial  tribunal,  he  might 
deem  the  moment  propitious  for  opening  to  his  soldiers  the 
way  to  Rome,  and  invoking,  at  the  same  time,  the  hallowed 
associations  of  republican  freedom.  He  intrigued  with  the 

1 We  possess  no  continuous  narrative  of  Domitian’s  reign.  Tlie  epitome 
of  Dion  is  peculiarly  meagre  and  confused,  and  in  its  slight  notice  of  the  revolt 
of  Antonius,  refers  its  date  to  “about  the  time”  of  Domitian’s  triumph.  Clin- 
ton accordingly  places  it  in  91.  Imhof,  however,  shows  that  there  is  reason 
for  fixing  it  as  late  as  93.  The  date  is  important,  inasmuch  as  all  the  authori- 
ties concur  in  remarking  that  it  was  after  this  event  that  Domitian’s  fears  im- 
pelled him  to  the  cruelties  which  make  his  name  so  infamous.  See  Suet. 
Dom.it.  10. ; Dion,  lxvii.  11. ; Victor,  Evil.  11. ; Comp.  Tac.  Aqric.  43. 
a Martial,  iv.  11. : 

“ Dum  nimium  vano  tumefaetus  nomine  gaudes, 

Et  Saturninum  te  miser  esse  pudet, 

Impia  Parrhasia  movisti  bella  sub  ursii, 

Qualia  qui  Phariee  conjugis  arma  tulit.” 

If  we  regarded  Martial’s  pieces  as  following  in  chronological  ordei,  we 
might  put  this  event  as  far  back  as  88  with  Tillemont.  Victor  ascribes  the 
revolt  of  Antonius  to  private  pique.  Domitian  had  called  him  by  an  oppro- 
brious term,  yet  one  which  seems  to  have  been  fully  bandied  about  among  the 
loose  talkers  and  loose  livers  of  the  time  : “ se  scortum  vocari  dolebat.” 


96 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  93. 


officers  of  his  two  legions, — such  was  the  amount  to  which, 
since  the  recent  disturbances,  the  forces  on  the  Rhine  had 
been  reduced, — and  the  title  of  Imperator  was  conferred  upon 
him  with  acclamations.  Jealous  as  the  Caesars  had  long 
been  of  their  lieutenants,  nevertheless,  in  still  greater  jealousy 
of  the  soldiers,  they  had  placed  in  their  hands  the  pecuniary 
means  of  waging  war  against  the  state  at  any  moment.  For 
in  order  to  retain  the  legionary  under  his  standards,  and  in- 
sure his  fidelity,  it  was  a rule  of  the  service  that  a portion  of 
his  pay, — as  much,  it  is  said,  as  one  half, — should  be  kept 
back  as  a reserved  fund,  till  the  period  of  his  discharge. 
Even  the  donatives  so  often  lavished  upon  the  soldiers  were 
thus  intercepted  on  their  way,  and  perhaps  in  the  same  pro- 
portion.1 A large  sum  of  ready  money  was  thus  accumulated 
in  the  military  chest ; and  when  the  legions  bound  up  their 
own  lives  and  fortunes  with  a chief  who  promised  to  lead 
them  to  plunder,  they  willingly  allowed  him  to  lavish  this 
convenient  hoard  on  the  requisite  preparations.  Antonius 
expected  aid  at  the  same  time  from  the  German  bank  of  the 
Rhine,  and  did  not  scruple,  it  seems,  to  call  into  the  field  the 
natural  enemies  of  Rome.  The  danger  was  imminent,  and 
Domitian,  who  was  not  timid  in  the  face  of  open  dangers, 
prepared  as  on  former  occasions  to  lead  his  own  forces  against 
his  adversary.  His  movements,  however,  were  anticipated 
by  the  vigour  of  a faithful  lieutenant.  Aorbauus  attacked 
Antonius  on  the  first  opening  of  spring,  when  the  sudden 
thaw  of  ice  prevented  the  barbarians  from  hastening  across 
the  Rhine  to  his  assistance.2  The  rebel  chief  was  quickly 

1 Suet.  Bondi.  V. : “ fiduciam  eessisse  ex  depositorum  summa  videbatur.” 
The  writer  represents  these  deposits  indeed  as  voluntary,  which  may  have  been 
partly  the  case;  but  the  account  given  of  the  usual  practice  by  Yegetius,  dc 
Mil.  Rom.  ii.  20.,  seems  to  offer  a better  explanation  of  the  custom. 

2 Suet.  JDomit.  6.  The  victory,  according  to  the  marvellous  story  of  the 
day,  was  known  at  Rome  on  the  very  day  that  it  occurred  in  Germany.  Sueto- 
nius is  confirmed  by  Plutarch,  JEmil.  25.  Similar  wonders  are  common  in 
Roman,  and,  indeed,  in  all  history.  So  of  the  battle  of  Pharsalia,  according  to 
the  tradition  no  doubt  faithfully  reported  by  Lucan,  vii.  204. : “ Spectari  e toto 
potuit  Pharsalia  mundo.” 


A.  U.  846.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


f»  7 

routed  and  slain.  Horbanus  had  perhaps  personal  reasons 
for  making  all  traces  of  the  conspiracy  disappear,  and  he 
destroyed  the  papers  of  the  vanquished  before  the  emperor 
could  demand  them.  Domitian  meanwhile  was  advancing 
from  Rome  with  a powerful  force,  dragging  with  him  many 
senators,  old  as  well  as  young,  whom  he  dared  not  leave  be- 
hind him  in  the  capital.  Disappointed  of  full  Fo]lowedb 
information  about  his  concealed  enemies,  he  ex-  proseriptioca. 
tended  all  the  more  widely  his  precautionary  severities,  and 
sought  to  terrify  the  rebel’s  friends  by  exhibiting  his  head 
upon  the  Rostra.  Such  were  the  ghastly  scenes  with  which 
the  proscriptions  of  the  olden  time  had  generally  commenced, 
and  now  again  proscription  followed  ; but  the  names  of  the 
victims  were  forbidden  to  be  inscribed  on  the  public  records.1 
Another  precaution  against  future  insurrections  was  to  for- 
bid the  soldiers  keeping  more  than  1000  sesterces  in  deposit 
at  their  standards  ; the  surplus  of  their  accumulated  arrears 
being  removed,  we  may  suppose,  to  some  central  quarters. 
It  was  further  determined  that  henceforth  two  legions  should 
never  occupy  the  same  winter  station  together.3 

These  jealous  measures  show  how  deep  a gloom  of  dis- 
trust was  thickening  before  Domitian’s  vision.  Hitherto  he 
had  been  content  perhaps  to  indicate  to  the  dela-  Domitian’s  tu- 
tors a few  among  the  high  nobility,  who,  if  con-  ror  an<1  crUelty- 
demned  with  a decent  show  of  judicial  process,  would  be  ac- 
ceptable victims  offered  to  the  necessities  of  the  fiscus.  How, 
however,  a feeling  more  potent  than  cupidity  seized  and 
mastered  him.  In  dire  alarm  for  his  power  and  his  life,  he 
saw  an  enemy  in  every  man  of  distinction  in  the  city  or  the 
camps ; and  the  short  career  which  yet  remained  to  him  be- 
came one  continued  paroxysm  of  terrified  ferocity.3 

1 Suet.  Domit.  10.  describes  the  torments  inflicted  on  the  culprits.  Dion, 
IxviL  11. : kic&hvce  a<pag  if  ra  v’KopvT/iJ.aTa  kcrypa<j>Tjvai. 

2 Suet.  Domit.  7. : “ Geminari  legionum  castra  prohibuit : nec  plus  quam 
mille  nummos  a quoquam  ad  signa  deponi.”  1000  sesterces=8Z. 

3 Victor,  Epit.  11. : “quo  per  Norbanum  Appium  acie  strato  Domitianus 
longe  tetrior  in  omne  hominum  genus,  etiarn  in  suos,  ferarum  more  grassaba, 


120 


VOL.  VII. — 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.D„  81. 


S£ 


CHAPTER  LXII. 

INTERNAL  HISTORY  UNDER  DOMITIAN. HIS  CHARACTER,  AND  STRENGTH  OF  THE 

EVIDENCE  AGAINST  IT. — HIS  REIGN  AN  EPOCH  OF  REACTION. — HE  AFFECTS  TO 
BE  A REFORMER  OF  MANNERS. — MEASURES  IN  HONOUR  OF  THE  GODS. — PROSE- 
CUTION OF  UNCHASTE  VESTALS. FATE  OF  CORNELIA. ENFORCEMENT  OF  THE 

LAWS  OF  ADULTERY. THE  SCANTINIAN  LAW. LAWS  AGAINST  MUTILATION. 

RESTRICTIONS  IMPOSED  ON  THE  MIMES. — DECREE  AGAINST  THE  CHALDEANS  AND 

PHILOSOPHERS,  A.  D.  89. ECONOMIC  MEASURES. RESTORATION  OF  THE  CAPITOL. 

— ASCRIPTION  OF  DIVINITY  TO  DOMITIAN.  — CULT  OF  ISIS  AND  CYBELE. — 
TRIBUTE  ENFORCED  ON  THE  JEWS. DEATH  OF  CLEMENS,  AND  ALLEGED  PER- 

SECUTION OF  THE  CHRISTIANS. — DOMITIAN  AS  A GOVERNOR,  ADMINISTRATOR, 
AND  LEGISLATOR. — HE  COUNTENANCES  DELATION. — FAVOURS  THE  SOLDIERS. — 
CARESSES  THE  POPULACE. SPECTACLES. THE  CAPITOLINE  AND  ALBAN  CON- 

TESTS.— PATRONAGE  OF  LITERATURE  REPAID  BY  FLATTERY. — DOMITIAN’S  GRIM 

HUMOUR. THE  COUNCIL  OF  THE  TURBOT,  AND  FUNERAL  BANQUET. DEATH 

OF  AGRICOLA,  A.  D.  93  : WITH  SUSPICION  OF  POISON : FOLLOWED  BY  PRO- 
SCRIPTION OF  SENATORS,  AND  SECOND  EDICT  AGAINST  THE  PHILOSOPHERS. — 
REIGN  OF  TERROR. — DOMITIAN’S  PERSONAL  ALARMS. — HE  IS  ASSASSINATED  BY 
HIS  FREEDMEN,  A.  D.  96. 

A.  D.  81-96.  A.  u.  834-849. 

SUCH  are  the  fragments  remaining  from  the  wreck  of  his- 
tory, which  embrace  what  little  we  know  of  the  external 
affairs  of  Rome  at  this  period.  Henceforth  we  must  he  con- 
tent to  work  with  these,  or  even  scantier  materials.  More 
interest,  if  not  more  completeness,  may,  however,  he  given 
to  our  sketch  of  the  Roman  interior,  by  scrutinizing  the 
character  of  the  emperor’s  domestic  administra- 

The  character  . . , 

of  Dom  it  km  tion.  It  happens,  indeed,  that  the  personal  char- 

of  the  itomaus  acter  oi  JJomitian,  the  most  conspicuous  figure 

on  the  scene,  reflects  with  peculiar  fidelity  the 

temper  of  the  age,  and  affords  a key  to  much  of  its  history. 


i.U  834.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


99 


The  degeneracy  of  the  sons  of  Vespasian  paints  the  decline 
of  the  Roman  people.  In  the  father  we  have  seen  a type  of 
the  armed  citizen  of  the  republic,  a Sabine  by  birth  and  tem- 
per, a genuine  representative  of  that  middle-class  which  still 
retained  the  stamp  of  rustic  simplicity,  so  long  associated  in 
the  imagination  of  the  Italians  with  the  farmers  of  the  hills, 
and  the  artisans  of  the  country  towns  of  Sabellia.  But  this 
native  simplicity  had  seldom  been  proof  against  the  seductions 
of  city  life.  Transplanted  from  their  cabins  in  the  mountains 
to  the  pillared  halls  of  the  Quirinal  or  the  Carinas,  the  chil- 
dren of  the  Apennines  were  sure  to  lose,  at  least  in  the  second 
generation,  the  rough  coating  of  antique  manners  which  pre- 
served their  moral  strength  and  hardihood,  and  to  adopt  the 
vices  of  patrician  luxury,  together  with  its  lustre  and  refine- 
ment. No  wonder  that,  bred  in  the  atmosphere  of  a court, 
the  sons  of  the  yeoman  of  Reate  should  quickly  cast  aside 
the  conventional  restraints  of  their  homely  childhood.  In  an 
earlier  and  manlier  age  the  transformation  would  have  been 
no  unmixecl  evil.  Civilization  ripens  the  growing  fruit, 
though  it  corrupts  the  fallen  and  over  mellow.  The  sweets 
of  polished  life  worked  like  poison  in  the  veins  of  the  plebe- 
ian of  Rome’s  silver  age,  substituting  feebleness  for  grace, 
pliancy  for  urbanity,  vicious  propensities  for  elegant  tastes. 
The  deterioration  was  more  marked  in  the  younger  of  the 
two  brothers,  inasmuch  as  he  was  tried  and  tempted  at  an 
earlier  age;  and  accordingly,  while  the  weakness  of  Titus 
appeared  in  occasional  or  pai’tial  defects,  that  of  Domitian 
was  found  to  pervade  and  leaven  his  whole  character.  The 
younger  Flavius  fell  at  once  into  that  moral  decrepitude  to 
which  the  Roman  people  had  been  descending  through  many 
generations.  With  some  kindly,  and  even  generous  emo 
lions,  not  wholly  devoid  of  refined  tastes,  and  of  a sound  in- 
telligence, he  lacked  the  tenacity  of  fibre  which  strung  the 
old  Roman  and  Sabine  fabric,  and  displayed  no  firm  deter- 
mination, no  vigour  and  persistence  in  his  designs.  The 
nerves  of  the  Roman  people  were  relaxed  by  ages  of  indulg- 
ence ; by  sensual  luxuries ; by  moral  turpitudes  ; by  long 


100 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  81. 


loss  of  self-respect ; and  they  were  now  generally  unequal  to 
any  sustained  exertion ; unable  even  to  keep  long  in  view 
any  arduous  and  noble  object.  The  contradictions  which 
appear  in  the  career  of  the  prince  before  us  are  the  same  we 
observe  in  the  people  generally.  Such  were  his  desire  for 
military  distinction  combined  with  caprice  and  timidity  in 
the  pursuit  of  it ; his  literary  tastes  and  leanings,  associated 
with  jealous  impatience  of  the  free  exercise  of  letters ; his 
softness  and  effeminacy  of  disposition,  issuing  in  jealous  cru- 
elty; his  love  of  law  and  discipline,  distorted  by  wanton 
freaks  of  tyranny;  his  mixture  of  gloomy  austerity  with 
childish  horse-play.1  From  this  conspicuous  example  we 
may  learn  how  unfit  were  the  people  whom  he  represented 
for  the  forms  of  self-government;  how  impossible  self-gov- 
ernment must  always  be  to  a nation  which  has  corrupted  it 
self  by  oppressive  violence,  by  licentious  dissipation,  and  by 
a tame  renunciation  of  the  rights  and  duties  of  political  life. 

There  is  none  of  the  Caesars,  except  perhaps  Caius,  against 
whom  the  evidence  of  history  is  so  uniform  and  consistent  as 
The  eyideueo  the  younger  Flavius.  There  may  have  been  a con- 
mitian' uniform  spiracy  out  of  court;  the  witnesses  may  have 
and  consistent,  peen  tampered  with  by  senatorial  agency.  No 
doubt  it  is  the  duty  of  the  judge  to  lean  against  the  weight 
of  testimony  so  suspiciously  harmonious.  But  as  long  as  he 
can  detect  no  flaw  in  the  chain  of  circumstance,  he  must 
leave  the  case,  with  only  an  admonitory  caution,  to  the  de- 
cision of  the  jury  represented  by  the  judgment  and  conscience 
of  succeeding  generations.  I would  content  myself  with, 
recommending  all  the  consideration  that  can  be  fairly  allowed 

1 Dion  describes  him  at  the  same  time  bold  and  passionate,  crafty  and  dis- 
sembling : ■zoAAa  {lev  ug  aiojitTog  ipninroiv  Tialv  eXv/xaivero,  noXAa  de 

tail  in  Trapaanevijg  knaKovpyei,  lxvii.  1.  The  tyrant  allowed  the  tyrants  his  pre- 
decessors to  be  freely  lashed.  Thus  Statius  says  of  Caligula  : “ nec  proximus 
hseres  Immitis  quanquam,  et  furiis  agitatus,  abegit.”  Sylv.  iii.  3.  70. ; of  Nero 
still  more  pointedly : “ pallidumque  visa  matris  lampade  respicit  Neronem,” 
Sylv.  ii.  7.  118.  The  Genetldiaeon  Lucani  is  a continued  protest  in  favour  of 
tlie  victim  of  Nero’s  cruelty.  Comp,  also,  Sylv.  v.  2.  33. 


A.  U.  834. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


101 


for  the  frightful  temptations  of  the  position.  The  abilities 
of  Domitian  seem  to  me  to  have  been  of  a higher  order  than 
they  are  generally  represented.  The  fulsome  eulogies  of 
some  of  his  flatterers  have  perhaps  injured  the  reputation  of 
the  man  who  was  at  least  weak  enough  to  tolerate  them. 
When  we  cast  an  eye  on  the  complex  system  of  administra- 
tion which  embraced  the  vast  extent  of  the  empire,  and  trace 
all  its  leading  threads  to  the  imperial  cabinet  on  the  Pala- 
tine, and  to  the  hand  of  the  eager,  impulsive,  and  luxurious 
child  of  fortune  there  installed,  we  must  admit  that  the  fact 
of  such  a machine  being  so  firmly  guided  for  so  many  years 
is  itself  an  answer  to  much  of  the  ribald  scandal  which  con- 
nects his  name  with  the  extreme  of  frivolity  and  licentious- 
ness. The  defects  of  Domitian  as  a governor  were  those  of 
-eccentricity  rather  than  feebleness,  his  ideas  were  crude  and 
ill-conceived,  misapplications  of  accredited  theories,  political 
anachronisms;  in  short,  the  errors  of  imperfect  education 
struggling  in  its  meshes,  casting  about  here  and  there  for 
advisers,  but  rejecting  the  control  of  favourites.  It  was  ob- 
served of  Domitian  by  a competent  critic  that  he  was  well 
served  by  his  ministers ; 1 and  the  course  of  our  history  will 
show  conclusively  that  of  all  the  Caesars  he  held  himself  most 
free  from  their  control  and  dictation  ; two  facts  which  speak 
with  equal  force  for  the  good  sense  and  natural  ability  of  a 
despot. 

The  reign  of  Domitian  was  an  epoch  of  administrative 
reaction,  such  as  repeatedly  occurred  in  the  history  both  of 
the  Republic  and  the  Empire,  when  an  attempt 

, Domitian’s 

was  made,  or  at  least  attected,  to  recall  society  reign  an  epueh 
to  ancient  principles  and  ideas.  There  is  some- 
thing striking  in  these  repeated  struggles  of  the  state  con- 
science, something  even  affecting  in  the  anxiety  evinced  by 
so  many  of  the  emperors,  by  some  who  were  personally 
among  the  most  selfish  and  vicious  of  them,  for  the  amend- 

1 Lamprid.  in  Alex.  Sever.  65.  The  passage  is  evidently  corrupt,  but  the 
remark  seems  to  be  attributed  to  Trajan. 


102 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  81 


ment  of  public  morals,  and  tbe  restoration  of  a golden  age 
of  virtuous  simplicity.  It  was  tbe  general  tendency  of  Pa* 
ganism  to  look  backward  rather  than  forward  ; and  the  em- 
perors, as  protectors  and  patrons  of  the  religious  sentiment 
among  then’  people,  which  had  no  hope  for  the  future,  in- 
stinctively directed  its  regretful  yearnings  towards  the  past, 
Domitian  was,  moreover,  a disciplinarian  by  birth  and 
breeding.  The  early  household  training  of  the  Roman  citi- 
Domition  af-  zen  still  made  itself  felt  in  his  temper  and  bear- 
t?on  orrman™a"  trig,  however  surprising  might  be  the  revolution 
ners-  in  the  circumstances  of  his  family.  The  antique 

severity  of  Sabellia  had  been  celebrated  from  primitive 
times : V espasian  had  retained  on  the  throne  of  the  world 
the  homely  manners  of  his  rude  stock.  The  sons,  especially 
the  younger,  while  they  cast  off  the  manners,  retained  in  no 
slight  degree  the  traditions  and  prejudices  of  their  fathers. 
Domitian  was  not  deterred  by  any  sense  of  his  own  vices 
from  the  attempt  to  reform  the  morals  of  his  countrymen. 
He  had  forfeited  none  of  the  Sabine  faith  in  temperance  and 
chastity,  by  his  personal  indulgence  in  the  grossest  excesses. 
Less  subtle  than  Augustus,  less  an  imitator  than  Claudius, 
his  projects  of  revival  sprang  with  more  genuine  impulse 
from  his  own  heart,  than  those  of  either  of  his  predecessors. 
He  had  no  need  of  the  sanctimonious  pretensions  which  cast 
on  Augustus  the  taint,  or  at  least  the  suspicion  of  hypocrisy. 
The  empire  which  the  first  princeps  founded  on  a moral  sen- 
timent was  now  firmly  fixed,  and  the  citizens  had  learnt  to 
acquiesce  in  the  decay  of  manners  as  the  law  of  their  destiny. 
Domitian’s  attempts  at  reform  were  unquestionably  sincere ; 
he  had  no  political  interest  to  serve  by  alarming  the  national 
conscience;  but  his  measures  sprang  from  a morbid  taste  for 
petty  discipline.  Nor  was  his  rigid  religionism  the  bastard 
product  of  a seared  heart  and  a troubled  conscience ; it  was 
not  the  despairing  effort  of  the  startled  sinner  to  slake  the 

furies  of  remorse  by  a bloody  propitiation.  It 

His  zeal  for  the  J . 1 1 . . 

purity  of  the  was  rather  a mixture  of  vanity  and  fanaticism 

vestal  virgins.  . ... 

engendered  by  the  prophecies  and  portents  which 


A.  U.  834.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


103 


had  heralded  the  elevation  of  his  house,  and  by  the  fortune 
which  had  saved  him  in  the  crisis  of  a godless  anarchy,  and 
made  him  the  instrument  for  restoring  the  patrons  of  Rome 
to  their  august  abodes.  Scarcely  was  Domitian  seated  on 
his  throne  when  he  began  to  hold  his  inquest  as  chief  pontiff 
on  the  irregularities  imputed  to  certain  of  the  Sacred  Virgins. 
The  fire  on  the  altar  of  Vesta,  the  mysterious  patroness  of 
the  commonwealth,  had  been  tended  from  the  earliest  ages 
by  a college  of  pure  maidens,  devoted  to  the  solemn  duty  by 
the  noblest  parents,  honoured  with  every  mark  of  outward 
deference,  bound  by  the  most  awful  sanctions  to  preserve 
their  virtue  unsullied  till  advancing  years  should  release 
them  from  their  honourable  servitude.  To  such  purity,  such 
sanctity,  the  mere  idea  of  death  was  repugnant.  The  culprit 
for  whom  they  interceded  must  be  pardoned;  the  criminal 
on  whom  they  barely  cast  their  eyes  on  his  way  to  the  scaf- 
fold, must  be  exempted  from  the  penalty  of  his  delinquen- 
cies. But  on  the  other  hand  the  punishment  of  guilt  in  one 
so  honoured  must  be  signal ; the  sinner  must  be  cut  off  from 
the  land  of  the  living,  and  hidden  away  from  the  sight  of  her 
fellow-creatures.  The  blood  of  the  wanton  vestal  was  not  to 
be  shed  by  man ; the  sword  of  earthly  justice  must  not  fall 
upon  her;  a higher  tribunal  demanded  a more  solemn  and 
appalling  sentence.  Ho  corpse  could  be  buried  in  the  city; 
but  in  placing  the  Vestal’s  tomb  at  a spot  within  the  walls 
the  Romans  seemed  to  violate  no  legal  principle,  for  she  de- 
scended alive  into  the  earth.1  The  horrid  rite  was  said  to 
have  been  originally  sanctioned  by  Huma,  and  tradition  told 
of  its  having  been  more  than  once  enacted  in  the  first  and 
brightest  ages  of  the  republic.  But  though  amidst  the  relax- 
ation of  later  manners,  the  sacred  ministers  of  the  pure  god- 
dess were  less  than  ever  exempt  from  infirmity,  the  sacrifice 
had  been  rarely  repeated,  and  for  more  than  two  centuries 
wholly  disused.3  It  was  generally  under  the  pressure  of  a 

The  ritualists  explained  this  mode  of  execution  as  an  offering  to  Vesta, 
vno  was  identified  with  Tellus,  the  goddess  of  the  earth.  Ovid.  Fast.  iv.  459. 

2 The  case  of  Opimia  occurred  a.  u-  273  ; that  of  Urbinia  284.  Dion.  Hal 


J 04 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  81 


public  calamity,  sucb  as  a pestilence,  or  the  occurrence  of 
evil  omens,  that  the  priests  bad  calmed  or  attempted  to  calm 
the  terror  of  the  citizens  by  decreeing  this  fearful  expiation ; 
and  a victim  sought  with  such  a purpose  was  sure  to  be 
found.  Had  Hero  been  a religious  reformer  he  would  doubt- 
less have  required  the  sacrifice  of  a Vestal  after  the  burning 
of  the  city.  Fortunately  that  monster  of  cruelty  was  not 
superstitious.  But  Rome  had  now  a tyrant  who  was  cruel 
and  superstitious  also.  And  with  his  superstition  was  min- 
gled perhaps  some  feeling  of  spite  towards  his  father  and 
brother,  with  - whom  he  always  maintained  a tacit  rivalry. 
He  complained  that  his  predecessors  had  relaxed  from  the 
old  prescriptions  of  religion,  and  had  neglected  the  due  pro- 
pitiation of  the  national  divinities.  The  burning  of  the  Cap- 
tol,  twice  repeated,  had  demanded  a signal  expiation,  and 
inquisition  into  110  suc^  expiation  had  been  made.  Domitian  in- 
their  character,  quired  into  the  conduct  of  the  Sacred  Virgins  ; 
the  inquisition  was  carried  back  to  past  years ; two  members 
of  the  college  were  denounced,  examined,  and  convicted ; 
but  the  temper  of  the  age  was  supposed  to  be  averse  from 
the  literal  execution  of  the  frightful  penalty,  and,  instead  of 
being  buried  alive,  the  culprits  were  allowed  to  kill  them- 
selves. Their  paramours,  who  might  have  been  scourged  to 
death  in  the  comitium,  were  graciously  permitted  to  retire 
into  banishment.1  Domitian  had  been  personally  intent  on 
a prosecution  from  which  he  expected  great  glory  to  redound 
on  his  administration ; thus  far  public  opinion  was  undoubt- 
edly with  him,  and  encouraged  him  to  proceed  in  his  inves- 
tigations.2 A third  victim,  named  Cornelia,  was  soon  brought 

Ant.  Horn.  viii.  89.,  is.  40.  Livy  mentions  the  sentence  against  Floronia  in 
633,  which  she  seems  to  have  escaped  by  flight,  xxii.  67. : and  a still  later  in- 
stance is  recorded  by  Dion  in  640.  See  Reimar  on  Dion,  lxvii.  3. 

1 Suet.  Domit.  8.  It  is  with  reference  to  these  cases  apparently  that  Do- 
mitian boasted,  according  to  Dion,  of  his  clemency  in  not  exacting  the  full 
penalty  of  the  law.  Dion,  lvii.  3. : ijyaXksTO  on  rag  aenrapBbovg  ug  rjvdpope. 
vag  ov  nar/dpv^ev,  d/Utd  aXkug  cnrodvr/aneiv  EKEAevoe. 

a Even  Apollonius  the  philosopher,  in  the  biography  of  Philostratus,  seems 


A.  U.  834.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


105 


oefore  him,  whose  fate  is  recorded  in  a letter  Cornelia  buried 
of  the  younger  Pliny,  in  which  the  dreadful  de-  aliv0, 
tails  of  these  barbarities  are  vividly  related.1  a.b.  91. 
Domitian,  advancing  from  horror  to  horror,  now  determined 
to  exact  the  penalty  in  all  its  atrocity.  The  culprit  was  con- 
demned and  duly  entombed  alive,  with  a crust  and  a flask 
of  water,  in  a vault  prepared  for  her.  The  narrator  is  moved 
indeed  to  pity  in  his  account  of  the  poor  creature’s  protesta- 
tions of  innocence ; yet  even  he  feels  more  keenly  the  arro- 
gance of  the  chief  pontiff  in  summoning  his  priests  to  his  im- 
perial villa  at  Alba,  instead  of  the  official  mansion  in  the 
forum,  than  the  abominable  cruelty  of  the  sentence  itself. 
The  alleged  partner  of  the  crime,  a Roman  knight,  was 
scourged  to  death,  protesting  his  innocence  also ; a praetorian, 
named  Licinianus,  who  was  suspected  of  criminality  with 
her,  but  against  whom  proof  seemed  to  fail,  was  induced  to 
make  a confession,  upon  which  his  escape  from  the  city  was 
connived  at.  Domitian  feared  that  he  had  shown  too  great 
eagerness  to  convict ; and  on  the  culprit’s  avowal  exclaimed 
with  evident  satisfaction,  that  he  was  now  himself  acquitted. 
Licinianus  was  allowed  to  remain  in  banishment,  and  some 
portion  of  his  property  was  reserved  from  confiscation.  Such 
however  was  the  sympathy  of  the  people  with  these  propi- 
tiatory sacrifices,  that  even  after  Domitian’s  fall,  the  virtu- 
ous A erva,  his  successor,  did  not  think  proper  to  recall  the 
exile.2 

The  zeal  of  Domitian  in  this  matter  was  actuated  not  by 
a moral,  but  by  a religious  feeling.  He  was  concerned  for 

to  approve  of  the  emperor’s  pious  severity,  vii.  6. : ical  pryv  nal  16yov  aQiKops- 
• >ov  ug  ha  fin  pav  nadapoiv  eli]  A opsriavog  ireTZOLJipevog  rfjg  'Pupatav 

'Ecm'af el  yap  nal  ci),  eipij,  KadapdsLjjg , ''H hie,  tgiv  adittuv  tj>6vuv 

av  iraaa  /rj  OLK.ovp.tvJi  pecrr)  vvv. 

1 Plin.  Up.  iv.  11.  Eusebius  gives  the  date  a.  d.  91.,  but  in  Chron.  Pasch. 
the  event  stands  two  years  earlier.  Clinton,  Past.  Pom.  in  ann.  91. 

2 Plin.  1.  c. : “ exilium  molle  yelut  prosminm  dedit.  Ex  quo  tamen  postea 
dementia  divi  Nervse  translates  est  in  Sicilians,  ubi  nunc  profiteturP  He  sup- 
ported himself  by  teaching  rhetoric. 


106 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D 81 


„ . . the  maintenance  of  an  ancient  cult,  not  for  the 

Domitian  en-  . # 7 

forces  the;  laws  preservation  of  personal  chastity.  The  purity 
of  the  vestals  was  dear  to  the  gods,  and  the  sov- 
ereign pleasure  of  the  gods  must  be  shielded  from  outrage 
by  human  disobedience.  But  next  to  the  purity  of  the  Sa- 
cred Virgins,  the  gods  fixed  the  seal  of  their  approval  on  the 
purity  of  married  life,  when  it  had  once  been  consecrated  by 
the  sanctions  of  certain  specific  ceremonies.  The  sole  object 
of  the  laws  against  adultery,  prescribed  by  Augustus,  and 
enforced  from  time  to  time  by  his  successors,  was  to  con- 
ciliate the  divine  patrons  of  the  married  state,  and  we  must 
not  confound  the  imperial  legislation  on  this  subject  with 
the  attempts  of  later  rulers,  under  the  influence  of  Chris- 
tian ideas,  to  repress  sins  of  incontinency  and  elevate  the 
morals  of  society.  Amidst  the  degradation  of  manners  at 
this  period,  the  citizens  themselves  seem  to  have  been  but 
imperfectly  aware  of  their  master’s  real  aim.  The  old  re- 
ligious ideas  were  dissolving,  and  some  vague  moral  instincts 
rising,  at  the  same  time,  into  greater  prominence  among 
them,  while  their  ruler  was  personally  actuated  only  by  the 
desire  of  reviving  the  old  ideas,  and  was  utterly  incapable 
of  sympathy  with  the  new.  The  sins  of  Domitian,  freely 
cited  against  him  in  pasquinade  and  innuendo,  were  gross 
moral  delinquencies ; 1 but  he  was  a blameless  worshipper  of 
the  divinities  of  the  Capitol.  He  might  live  in  incestuous 
intercourse  with  his  own  brother’s  daughter  after  her  widow- 
hood ; but  he  had  stiffly  declined  to  marry  her  as  a virgin, 
and  contract  a union  which,  though  sanctioned  by  a recent 
enactment,  was  fundamentally  opposed  to  the  principles  of 
the  state  religion.  When  he  upheld  and  enforced  the  law 
of  adultery,  the  satirist  might  assert  that  such  new-fangled 
strictness  was  enough  to  terrify  the  licentious  deities  of 
Olympus ; but  Mars  and  V enus  were  not  transgressors  of 
the  Julian  law,  and  Vulcan  had  not  taken  his  celestial  spouse 

1 Pliny,  1.  c.  scoffs  at  the  zeal  for  purity  of  a judge,  who  was  said  to  live  in 
incest  with  his  own  niece : “ cum  ipse  fratris  filiam  incesto  ....  poUuiseet.” 
Comp.  Panegyr.  62.  63. 


«l.U.  834.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


107 


with  the  holy  rites  of  confarreation.1 *  Even  Domitian’s  false 
principles  were  better  than  none  at  all.  The  dawn  of  better 
things,  however,  was  beginning  to  break,  and  the  heathens 
were  feeling  their  way  with  doubt  and  hesitation  towards  it. 
The  twelfth  of  the  Caesars  was  the  last  of  the  reactionary 
emperors  ; from  henceforth  their  attempts  at  moral  reforma- 
tion began  to  look  forward  instead  of  backward  ; they 
made  their  appeal  to  the  moral  sense  of  man,  in  its  gradual 
development,  not  to  the  effete  traditions  of  an  antique  the- 
ology. The  enforcement  of  the  Julian  law  produced  the 
punishment  of  some  culprits  of  distinction ; the  crime  of 
defamation  was  prosecuted  with  renewed  severity  against 
both  men  and  women  of  the  highest  rank  ; the  revival  of  the 
Scantinian  enactments  against  a disQmstino-  form 

° . Enforcement 

of  vice,  which  the  law,  much  to  its  honour,  had  of  tiie  scanti- 

_ -.  . . . _ . , nian  law. 

branded  from  ancient  times,  may  have  excited 
still  further  surprise  and  indignation.3  It  is  true  that  in  the 
later  years  of  the  republic  the  penalty  of  death  was  com- 
muted in  these  cases  to  a fine  of  only  a thousand  sesterces, 
and  the  crime  itself  was  limited  to  acts  of  incontinency  be- 
tween Roman  citizens.  Here  too,  it  was  not  the  moral  tur- 
pitude that  the  law  regarded,  but  solely  the  violation  of  a 
political  enactment.  Ho  delinquency  was  imputed  to  the 
stranger,  no  protection  was  thrown  over  the  slave.  The  ex- 
cesses of  Domitian  himself,  which  he  allowed  his  court  poets 
to  deck  with  their  choicest  verses,  were  no  violation  of  the 
principle  which  he  now  recalled  into  operation.3  The  subject 
is  one  on  which  it  is  impossible  to  dwell ; but  a passing  allu- 
sion may  suffice  to  explain  the  apparent  confusion  of  prudery 
and  licentiousness  which  reigned  in  the  minds  of  the  Roman 


1 Juvenal,  ii.  29. 

“ Qualis  erat  nuper  tragico  pollutus  adulter 
Concubitu,  qui  turn  leges  revocabat  amaras 
Omnibus,  atque  ipsis  Yeneri  Martique  timendas.” 

* Suet.  Domit.  8.;  Dion,  lxvii.  12. 

% Statius,  Sylv.  iii.  4. 


108 


niSTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  81. 


„ legislators.  In  one  direction  indeed,  and  one 

And  of  laws  ° . . ’ 

against  mutiia-  only,  Domitian  seems  to  have  deviated  from  his 
usual  recurrence  to  ancient  prescriptions,  and  to 
have  acted  on  the  motion  of  a more  enlightened  moral  con- 
science.1 No  Roman  legislator  before  him  had  forbidden 
the  detestable  practice  of  human  mutilation.  This  iniquity 
had  been  from  early  times  the  opprobrium  of  the  East;  and 
so  much  had  men’s  feelings  been  blunted  to  the  degradation 
it  inflicted,  that  eunuchs  had  been  allowed  to  sit  upon  the 
throne  of  Persia.2  So  abhorrent  however  had  it  been  to  the 
manlier  sentiment  of  the  West,  that  amid  all  the  abominations 
to  which  the  Romans  had  debased  themselves,  here  at  least 
they  had  maintained  the  rights  of  nature  and  humanity  long 
after  the  more  effeminate  Greeks  had  cast  off  the  last  re- 
straints of  self-respect.  The  custom  of  buying  young  slaves 
thus  foully  treated  had  been  introduced  into  the  palace  from 
the  example  of  the  Asiatic  courts,  probably  by  Caius,  the  first 
imperial  imitator  of  Oriental  depravities  ; hut  Claudius,  with 
his  habitual  recurrence  to  national  usage,  had  perhaps  resist- 
ed it,  and  had  brought  some  impertinent  remarks  on  himself 
by  his  regard  for  decorum  if  not  for  principle.  Under  Nero 
the  fashion  had  again  flourished,  and  spread  from  the  palace 
to  the  mansions  of  the  nobility.  Seneca  declaims  with  petu- 

1 The  insinuation  that  Domitian  had  no  other  motive  than  to  cast  a reflec- 
tion on  his  predecessor  seems  unreasonable.  Dion,  lxvii.  2.  The  emperor’s 
contemporaries  may  be  suspected  of  flattery,  as  Martial,  vi.  2.,  and  elsewhere, 
and  Statius,  Si/lv.  iv.  3.  13. ; but  Ammianus  Marcellinus  expresses  the  deliber- 
ate judgment  of  a much  later  age:  “juvat  veterem  laudare  Domitianum,  qui 
receptissima  inclaruit  iege,  qua  minaeiter  interdixerat  ne  intra  terminos  juris- 
dictionis  Roman®  castraret  quisquam  puerum,”  xviii.  4. 

2 Plin.  Hist.  Nat.  xiii.  9.  Comp,  the  story  of  Bagoas,  Diod.  Sic.  xvii.  5. 
Ammianus  Marcellinus,  xiv.  6.,  attributes  the  invention  to  Semiramis.  Comp. 
Olaudian,  in  Eutrop.  i.  339.  Periander  of  Corinth  was  the  first  to  introduce  it 
into  Greece,  Herod,  iii.  49.  And  it  was  from  Greece,  or  the  Greek  monarchies 
in  Asia,  that  the  Romans  no  doubt  adopted  it,  though  they  were  pleased  to 
impute  this  corruption  of  their  manners  to  their  intercourse  with  Parthia, 
Claudian,  in  Eutrop.  i.  415. : “ Arsacio  postquam  se  regia  fastu  Sustulit,  el 
nostros  corrupit  Parthia  mores.” 


4.U.  834.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


10? 


lance  rather  than  indignation  against  it ; Pliny,  with  more 
dignity,  is  silent  upon  the  odious  subject.1  In  the  writings  of 
Martial,  Statius,  and  Juvenal,  it  becomes  obtrusively  promi- 
nent. Domitian  himself  had  his  miserable  favourites,  and  the 
custom  he  pretended  to  denounce  was  never  abandoned  in 
the  high  places  of  the  empire  till  it  was  again  forbidden  by 
Christian  legislators.2 

This  edict  was  intended  to  curb  the  shameless  luxury  of 
the  great,  and  restore  the  modest  dignity  of  ancient  manners 
among  the  senators  and  nobles.  In  order  to 

Measures 

brace  the  morals  of  the  lower  ranks,  our  reformer  against  the 
revived  the  laws  of  his  predecessors  against  the 
instruments  of  more  vulgar  pleasures,  the  singers  and  dancers 
of  the  theatres,  whose  contentions  or  rather  the  contentions  of 
whose  patrons  and  partisans,  had  troubled  the  police  of  the  city 
for  many  generations.  Augustus  had  issued  proclamations  to 
control  these  noxious  artists,  and  Tiberius  had  banished  them 
from  Rome.  They  were  denounced  to  the  guardian  of  public 
virtue,  not  untruly,  as  corrupters  of  the  women  as  well  as  viola- 
tors of  the  peace  of  the  city.  But  these  attempts  had  signally 
failed.  Under  Nero  the  factions  of  the  theatre  and  the  circus 
had  filled  the  streets  with  tumult  and  bloodshed.  The  mimes 
found  no  doubt  a protector  in  the  prince  of  mimes,  but  hi 
fact  the  passion  of  the  populace  for  these  performances  had 
always  defeated  the  legislation  of  the  reformers.  Yespasian 
seems  to  have  desisted  from  what  he  deemed  a futile  proscrip- 
tion. It  was  not  till  Domitian’s  accession  to  power  that  an- 
other serious  effort  was  made  to  impose  a check  on  these 
disorders.  The  measures  of  this  prince  were  moderate,  and 
perhaps  the  circumstances  of  the  times  favoured  his  inter- 
ference. The  increasing  extent  and  frequency  of  the  shows 
in  the  amphitheatres,  the  introduction  of  new  and  grosser 

1 Senec.  Epist.  95.  24. ; Be  Brev.  Vit.  12.  4 

2 The  edict  of  Domitian  was  repeated  in  latei  times,  showing  that  the  prac- 
tise was  not  eradicated.  See  the  Digest,  xlviii.  8.  884.  Comp,  also  Justin 
Martyr,  Apol.  i.  29.  The  legislation  of  the  Christian  emperors  on  the  subject 
is  reviewed  by  Wallon,  Hist,  de  VEsdavage,  dte.,  Pt.  iii.  ch.  x. 


110 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  81. 


forms  of  public  amusement,  may  have  weaned  the  populace 
from  the  more  refined  diversions  of  dancing  and  singing.  To 
the  smaller  class  who  still  retained  a taste  for  art  and  elegance, 
the  emperor  allowed  the  gratification  of  witnessing  the  ballet 
in  their  private  houses,  and  he  was  satisfied  with  merely  for- 
bidding such  performances  in  public.1 2  From  this  time  the 
regulations  against  the  mimes  were  alternately  enforced  and 
suspended ; but  no  such  scandal  seems  again  to  have  arisen 
from  them  as  in  the  first  century  of  the  empire.  Domitian 
had  also  his  personal  favourites  among  this  profession,  and 
allowed  them  easy  access  to  his  person.  Such  was  Latinus, 
who  boasted  that  his  manners  were  untainted  by  the  disso- 
luteness common  to  his  associates,  and  that  he  was  a player 
only  upon  the  stage.3  Such  too  was  Paris,  a man  of  greater 
note,  the  Roscius  of  the  empire,  who  seems  to  have  justified 
the  imputation  cast  on  his  profession  of  corrupting  female 
morals,  if  the  story  be  true  that  he  was  the  notorious  para- 
mour of  Domitia,  and  was  at  last  waylaid  and  assassinated 
in  the  streets,  on  that  account,  by  the  emperor’s  orders. 
Domitian  hardly  refrained,  in  the  first  access  of  passion,  from 
inflicting  death  upon  his  consort  also.  As  a noble  Roman  he 
could  not  do  less  than  solemnly  divorce  her;  but  he  did  not 
long  endure  the  separation,  and  presently  recalled  her  to  the 
palace  pretending  that  the  people  required  it.3  His  rage, 

1 Suet.  Domit.  7. : “ interdisit  histrionibus  scenam,  intra  domurn  quidem 
exercendi  artem  jure  concesso.”  On  the  other  hand,  he  added  Wo  factions,  the 
golden  and  the  purple,  to  the  four  already  established  in  the  circus.  Suet.  L c. ; 
Dion,  lxvii.  4. 

2 Suet.  Domit.  15.:  Martial,  1.  5.,  ix.  29.,  who  makes  him  say  of  himself : 

“ sola  scenicus  arte  feror : 

Nec  poteram  gratus  domino  sine  moribus  esse.” 

Latinus,  However,  had  other  recommendations  to  imperial  favour,  if,  as  is  c on- 
jectured,  he  was  the  delator  of  Juvenal,  i.  35.,  vi.  44. 

3 Dion,  lxvii.  3. ; Suet.  Domit.  3.  Dion  mentions  the  divorce  under  the 
year  83  (the  9th  consulship  of  Domitian),  and  the  date  of  so  solemn  an  act 
must  have  been  well  known.  But  this  was  at  least  ten  years  from  the  mar- 
riage, and  Domitian  was  supposed  to  have  been  long  carrying  on  bis  inter 
course  with  Julia,  which  he  continued  after  receiving  his  wife  back. 


A..  U.  834.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


Ill 


however,  against  the  seducer  was  not  appeased  even  by  the 
death  of  the  victim.  He  seized  and  chastised  the  unfortunate 
player’s  admirers,  when  they  assembled  on  the  spot  where  he 
had  fallen,  and  strewed  it  with  flowers.  Some  indeed  ascribe 
the  edict  against  the  mimes  to  this  personal  mortification ; but 
we  must  guard  ourselves  against  the  proneness  of  our  authori- 
ties to  find  a special  motive  for  every  occurrence  of  the  times. 
The  prohibition  was  more  probably  part  of  the  settled  policy 
already  noticed.  Thus  when  a quasstorian  senator  ventured 
to  appear  on  the  stage,  an  irregularity  against  which  Augus- 
tus, as  we  have  seen,  had  so  earnestly  contended,  Domitian 
revived  the  precedent  of  the  first  imperial  reformer,  and  ex- 
pelled the  offender  from  the  illustrious  order.1 

The  same  jealousy  with  which  the  government  had  so 
long  regarded  the  licentiousness  of  the  stage,  had  been  extend- 
ed even  from  an  earlier  period,  to  the  Chaldseans 

x 1 . Edicts  against 

and  astrologers,  the  men  of  occult  science,  ivho  the  astrologers 

. . . . . . and  the  philoso- 

agitated  society  with  visions  and  predictions,  and  pliers, 
filled  with  nefarious  intrigues  the  families  of  the  a.  t>.  so. 
citizens.  Every  interdict  on  players  and  dancers 
was  accompanied  with  a proclamation  against  the  mathe- 
matici.  Yespasian’s  practical  good  sense  had  tolerated  this 
class  also ; for  the  evil,  if  repressed  in  one  shape,  was  sure, 
as  he  knew,  to  spring  up  in  another.  The  diviners  indeed 
deserved  some  favour  from  the  adventurer  whom  their  breath 
had  seemed  to  waft  to  fortune.  But  Domitian,  the  third  of 
his  dynasty,  might  fear  every  portent  of  change,  which  to 
him  could  only  be  a change  from  good  to  evil.  In  common 
with  all  the  princes  who  succeeded  to  an  hereditary  throne, 
he  was  induced  to  regard  the  prophets  as  his  natural  ene- 
mies.2 It  is  impossible  to  say  to  what  extent  the  astrologers 

1 Suet.  Domit.  8. : “ quasstorium  virum,  quod  gesticulandi  saltandique  stu- 
dio teneretur,  movit  senatu.”  Dion,  lxvii.  13.,  adds  the  name  Caecilius  Rufinus. 
I presume  that  the  culprit  exhibited  himself  in  public. 

2 Tertullian  pertinently  asks : “ cui  autem  opus  est  perscrutari  super  Cse- 
saris  salute,  nisi  a quo  aliquid  adversus  ilium  cogitatur  vel  optatur  ? ” Apo- 
log.  35.  Seuec.  Ludus  in  Morte  Claud,  c.  3. : “ mafchematicos,  qui  ilium,  es 


112 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  81 


and  tlie  philosophers  were  now  connected  together : Apollo- 
nius of  Tyana,  for  instance,  one  of  the  greatest  moral  teachers 
of  the  time,  appears  to  ns,  even  in  the  pages  of  his  own  biog- 
rapher, as  a diviner  and  a thaumaturge ; it  is  possible,  however, 
that  his  character  in  this  respect  is  misrepresented  by  the  in- 
judicious admiration  of  a less  intelligent  age.  But  enough 
intimacy  subsisted,  doubtless,  between  the  two  classes  to 
excite  the  jealousy  of  the  government,  and  to  induce  Domi- 
tian  to  renew  his  father’s  decrees  against  the  professors  of 
Grecian  wisdom.  It  does  not  appear  indeed  that  he  was 
more  stringent  in  his  measures  than  his  predecessor.  The 
expelled  philosophers  assembled  without  molestation  in  the 
Campanian  villas  of  their  noble  patrons,  and  even  under  the 
walls  of  the  city.1  Probably  some  special  exceptions  were 
made,  and  a more  distant  banishment  required  in  the  case  of 
the  more  turbulent  or  more  notoriously  disaffected.  A much 
greater  outcry  was  raised  against  the  illiberality  of  Domitian 
than  against  that  of  his  father ; but  whether  this  was  owing 
to  the  greater  severity  of  his  measures,  or  the  detestation  in 
which  he  was  generally  held,  may  be  still  a question.2 

quo  princeps  factus  est,  omnibus  annis,  omnibus  mcnsibus  efferunt.”  Comp. 
Dubois  de  Guchan,  Tacite  cl  son  siecle , i.  515. 

1 Pliny,  Epist.  iii.  11.,  speaks  of  visiting  one  of  the  banished  philosophers 
“ in  Suburbano.”  “ Equidem  cum  essent  philosoplii  ab  urbe  submoti,  fui  apud 
ilium  in  Suburbano,  et  quo  notabilius  hoc  periculosiusque  esset,  fui  Praetor.” 
In  the  life  of  Apollonius,  vii.  11.,  Demetrius,  Apollonius,  and  others  are  repre- 
sented as  discoursing,  during  this  period,  in  Cicero’s  Cumaean  villa : “ Happy 
insects,”  exclaimed  one  of  them,  on  hearing  the  grasshoppers  chirping,  “ that 
can  sing  your  old  song,  free  from  the  jealousy  of  tyrants,  from  sensual  pas- 
sions, from  envy,”  &e.  Yet  only  a few  pages  before,  (c.  4.)  the  biographer 
had  represented  many  at  least  of  the  class  as  flying  to  Gaul,  Africa  and  the 
deserts  of  Scythia  for  safety. 

2 The  forcible-feeble  satire  of  Sulpicia  supplies  a fair  measure  of  the  im- 
portance to  be  attached  to  this  act  of  the  government,  which  seems  to  have 
been  much  exaggerated ; as,  for  instance,  in  that  gush  of  laboured  rhetoric : 

“ Die  mihi  Calliope,  quidnam  pater  ille  deorum 
Cogitat  ? an  terras  et  patria  sascula  mutat, 

Quasque  dedit  quondam  morientibus  eripit  artes  ? 

Nosaue  jubet  tacitos,  et  jam  rationis  egenos, 


A.  a.  834.1 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


113 


To  give  an  antique  colour  to  these  proceedings,  and  re- 
mind the  citizens  of  the  long-accredited  principles  on  which 
they  were  founded,  Domitian  had  assumed  from  ^ 

J Domitian  as- 

an  early  period  the  office  of  censor,  which  he  con-  sumes  the  cen- 
, , , _ , . sorship,  and 

tmued  to  hold,  contrary  to  all  precedent,  through-  institutes  re- 

out  the  remainder  of  his  reign.1  By  repeated 
enactments  he  endeavoured  to  drill  his  subjects,  at  least  with- 
in the  city,  to  the  maintenance  of  external  decorum ; he  reg- 
ulated their  dress,  their  behaviour,  their  places  in  the  thea- 
tres ; he  attempted  to  preserve,  amidst  the  mass  of  nations 
and  habits  fermenting  around  him,  an  image  of  the  ancient 
republic,  which  should  attract  the  eye  both  of  gods  and  men, 
and  engage  the  favour  of  the  one  and  the  reverence  of  the 
other.  Such  were  the  points  to  which,  as  we  have  repeatedly 
seen,  the  attention  of  all  the  imperial  reformers  was  directed, 
and  Domitian  may  have  had  a personal  motive  to  quicken 
his  zeal  from  the  wish  to  connect  himself,  as  the  representa- 
tive of  a new  dynasty,  with  the  traditions  of  the  families 
which  had  ruled  by  right  divine  before  him.  But,  often  as 
we  have  noticed  the  recurrence  of  measures  for  the  regulation 
of  manners,  we  seldom  meet  with  an  instance  of  legal  inter- 
ference with  economical  interests.  The  government  of  Do- 
mitian, however,  is  distinguished  by  a sumptuary  edict  of 
this  character,  which  cannot  fail  to  attract  observation.  It 
gives  us  a glimpse,  at  least,  of  the  attitude  assumed  by  the 
state  towards  industry,  whether  as  its  patron  or  its  oppressor. 
W e have  discovered  already  more  than  one  symptom  of  the 
decay  of  wealth  among  the  nobles  of  Rome.  This  decay  was 

Non  aliter  quam  cum  primo  surreximus  sevo, 

Glandibus  et  purge  rursus  procumbere  lymphse  ? ” 

The  specific  cases  of  punishment  were  those  of  declaimers  or  conspirers 
against  the  government,  such  as  Maternus;  Dion,  lxvii.  12.  Two  edicts  were 
issued  in  89  and  93,  94.  Euseb.  Chron .,  Tac.  Agr.  2.,  Dion,  lxvii.  13. ; and 
the  last  seems  to  have  followed  on  the  suppression  of  the  Antonian  revolt. 

1 Suet.  Dornit  8. ; Dion,  lxvii.  4. : TtgrjTr/Q  dia  P'lov  iroorog  Kal  gdvoc  na) 
Idiarav  ital  avT0KnaT6f?uv  kxeipOTovijOii.  Comp.  Statius,  Sylv.  iv.  3.  13.;  Mar 
tial,  vi.  4. : “ Censor  maxime,  principumque  princeps.” 


114 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


f A.  D.  81. 


undoubtedly  in  continual  progress,  and  was  now  plainly  ap- 
parent in  portions  even  of  Italy.  In  the  great  towns  and  the 
more  favoured  districts  of  the  coast  or  inland,  it  was  disguis- 
a decline  of  ed  by  a vast  display  of  borrowed  magnificence, 
tobe1 peree’ivcd  ^ie  outlay  of  rent  or  tribute  from  every  quarter 
in  Italy.  of  j]IG  globe;  and  the  government  had  sought 

anxiously  to  conceal  it,  by  attracting  the  wealthiest  of  its 
subjects  to  the  neighbourhood  of  the  capital,  and  fixing  them 
with  their  liberal  expenditure  in  the  centre  of  the  empire. 
Meanwhile  the  operation  of  natural  laws  was  constantly 
working  in  a contrary  direction.  The  wasteful  and  expensive 
processes  of  slave  labour  were  devouring  the  capital  of  the 
proprietors,  not  in  Italy  only,  but  in  all  the  seats  of  the  old- 
est civilization,  especially  in  Greece,  and  the  lesser  Asia. 
This  decline  was  at  the  same  time  hastened  by  the  demands 
of  the  government  on  certain  provinces,  such  as  Africa,  Spain, 
Gaul  and  Britain,  where  the  productiveness  of  the  soil  was 
generally  developed  by  the  hands  of  free  coloni.  According- 
ly, not  in  Italy  only,  but  in  Greece  and  Asia,  the  production 
of  corn  had  materially  diminished,  and  fertile  land  had  been 
withdrawn  from  the  plough ; but  in  its  place  many  a ridge 
of  barren  hill-side  had  been  scarped  and  terraced  for  the 
vineyard.  Wine,  the  produce  hitherto  of  some  limited  dis- 
tricts of  the  empire,  was  becoming  more  and  more  the  com- 
mon beverage  of  the  whole  population  in  every  province,  and 
demanded  an  ever-increasing  area  for  its  production.  It 
would  seem,  therefore,  that  the  great  change  which  had  thus 
occurred  in  the  economical  circumstances  of  different  parts 
of  the  Roman  world,  was  the  natural  result  of  their  amalga- 
mation in  one  body  politic,  and  the  nearly  uniform  system 
of  law  and  impost  that  prevailed  throughout  it.  We  may 
conclude  that  the  complaints  we  have  heard  of  the  decay  of 
agriculture  were  only  partially  true,  and  do  not  fairly  repre- 
sent the  actual  state  of  the  whole  empire. 

It  was  not  to  be  expected,  however,  that  the  statesmen  of 
Rome  should  take  a broad  and  scientific  view  of  interests  so 


A.  U.  834.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


115 


widely  extended,  and  so  complex  in  their  nature,  Edict  respect- 
and  we  need  not  wonder  at  the  confusion  into  the1'™* 

which  they  fell,  in  seeking  a remedy  for  evils  of  vme- 
which  they  saw  neither  the  causes  nor  the  compensations, 
nor,  indeed,  are  our  accounts  sufficiently  intelligent  or  explicit, 
to  enable  us  to  understand  the  real  action  of  the  government, 
still  less  to  penetrate  its  motives.  A strange  story  is  report- 
ed, on  the  trifling  authority  of  Philostratus  in  his  life  of 
Apollonius,  that  Domitian  forbade  the  cultivation  of  the  vine 
in  the  Ionian  provinces,  because,  forsooth,  wine  excited  the 
people  to  tumults  and  seditions.1  He  commanded,  not  only 
that  no  more  vines  should  be  planted,  but  that  the  existing 
plantations  should  be  rooted  up.  The  lonians,  it  is  added, 
sent  a deputation  to  Rome  to  plead  for  the  industry  by  which 
they  subsisted,  and  the  sophist  Scopelianus,  whom  they  em- 
ployed to  argue  for  them,  was  so  successful  that  the  decree 
was  rescinded,  and  penalties  denounced  against  those  who 
should  neglect  the  cultivation  of  the  vine  in  future.  It  seems 
more  likely  that  this  edict  was  part  of  a general  measure, 
such  as  that  indicated  by  Suetonius,  by  which  the  emperor, 
alarmed  at  the  increasing  dearth  of  corn  and  cheapness  of 
wine,  prohibited  the  withdrawal  of  arable  land  from  the 
plough  in  Italy,  and  restricted  the  cultivation  of  the  vine 
throughout  the  provinces  to  one  half  at  most  of  the  extent  to 
which  it  had  been  developed.2  If  such  an  arbitrary  regula- 
tion was  ever  seriously  meant  to  be  enforced,  it  is  plain  that 
it  could  not  have  been  really  executed,  nor  could  the  emperor 
himself  be  long  deceived  by  the  erroneous  principles  on  which 
it  was  founded.  He  soou  desisted  from  the  attempt.  The 

1 Philostr.  Vit.  Apoll.  vi.  42. : comp.  Vit.  Sophist,  i.  12.  To  this  edict  and 
to  that  which  enforced  the  Julian  law,  the  temperate  philosopher  declared  him- 
self equally  indifferent:  p6vog  yap  avdp&i xuv  ovt’  aidoiav  Seopai  ovr’  oivov. 
Vespasian,  according  to  Philostratus,  had  deprived  the  Greek  cities  of  their 
autonomy  on  account  of  their  turbulence. 

2 Suet.  Domit.  7. : “ ne  quis  in  Italia  novellaret,  atque  in  provinciis  vineta 
exciderentur,  relicta,  ubi  plurimum,  dimidia  parte : nec  exsequi  rem  perseve' 
ravit.” 


ilG 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  81. 


remembrance  of  it  was  chiefly  preserved  by  the  pungent  epi- 
gram of  Evenus,  which  declared  that  extirpate  the  vine  as  he 
might,  there  should  still  remain  wine  enough  to  pour  a liba- 
tion on  the  imperial  victim.1 2  The  culture  of  the  vine  contin- 
ued however  to  depend  on  the  favour  of  the  government. 
Thus  we  read  at  a later  period,  of  the  emperor  Probus  grant- 
ing such  an  indulgence  to  certain  of  the  northern  provinces.* 
The  senate  long  before,  expressly  for  the  advantage  of  the 
Italian  vine-growers,  but  possibly  with  the  further  object  of 
stimulating  the  growth  of  corn  in  its  dependencies,  proscrib- 
ed the  cultivation  of  the  vine  throughout  the  transalpine 
regions.3 


As  regarded  the  observance  of  religious  forms,  Dornitian 
seems  to  have  felt  it  incumbent  on  him  to  follow  closely  in 
the  steps  of  Augustus.  Thus  he  repeated,  as  we 
have  seen,  after  a lapse  of  only  forty-one  years, 
the  celebration  of  the  secular  games  by  Claudius, 
pleading  perhaps  that  more  than  a century  had  elapsed  since 
that  solemn  ceremony  had  been  performed  by  the  founder  of 
the  empire.4  He  enacted  with  dignity  the  part  of  censor  and 


Domitian’s 
buildings  in 
Kome. 


1 I cannot,  with  some  critics,  cite  the  line  quoted  above,  “ Glandibus  et 
purse  rursus  procumbers  lymphae,”  as  a reference  to  this  edict.  The  epigram 
of  Evenus  is  a well-known  parody  on  an  older  couplet : 

k<?v  fie  <j>ayi]Q  kid  pi£av,  opue  eri  r.apiroipopTjaa 
oaaov  imoiteioat.  K aiaapi  Ovopkvo).  Anthol.  i.  97.  Jacobs. 

2 Eutrop.  ix.  17.:  “ vineas  Gallos  et  Pannonios  habere  permisit.”  Yopiscus 
in  Prob.  18. : “ Gallis  omnibus  et  Hispanis  et  Britannis  hie  permisit  ut  vites 
haberent,  vinumque  confieerent.” 

3 Cicero,  de  Rcpubl.  iii.  9. : “ nos  vero  justissimi  homines,  qui  transalpinas 
gentes  oleam  et  vitem  serere  non  sinimus,  quo  pluris  sint  nostra  oliveta,  nos- 
traeque  vineae.”  It  is  evident  that  this  interdict  did  not  long  continue  in  force. 

4 Suet.  Domit.  4.:  Censorin.  de  Die  Nat.  17.:  Tac.  Ann.  xi.  11.  The 
secular  games  of  Dornitian  are  referred  to  his  fourteenth  consulship,  i.  e., 
a.  u.  c.  841.  Eckhel,  vi.  384. : Clinton,  sub.  ann.  On  this  occasion  Tacitus 
officiated  as  one  of  the  college  of  Quindecimvirs.  He  was  also  Praetor  at  the 
lime.  “Domitianus  edidit  ludos  sssculares,  iisque  intentius  affui  sacerdotio 
quindecimvirali  praeditus  ac  turn  praetor.”  Comp.  Hist.  i.  1.  “ dignitatem  nos- 
trum a Vespasiano  inchoatam,  a Tito  auctam,  a Domitiano  longius  provectam 
nou  abnuerim.” 


A.  U.  834.  j 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


m 


chief  pontiff,  and  visited  with  stern  reproof  every  appearance 
of  disrespect  to  the  gods  and  their  temples.  When  one  of 
his  own  freedmen  ventured  to  make  use  of  some  pieces  of 
marble,  destined  for  re-building  the  Capitol,  for  a monument 
to  his  son,  he  caused  the  monument  to  be  destroyed,  and 
flung  the  remains  of  the  buried  child  into  the  sea.'  The 
wondrous  preservation  he  had  himself  experienced  in  the 
sack  of  the  sacred  fane,  seems  to  have  sunk  deeply  into  his 
mind,  and  fancying  himself  the  special  object  of  divine  pro- 
tection, he  made  genuine  efforts  to  repay  the  obligation  with 
lavish  expenditure.  It  was  his  privilege  to  retrieve  the  dis- 
asters which  had  befallen  the  empire  under  a father  and 
brother  less  favoured  than  himself.  To  him  it  fell  to  com- 
plete a second  restoration  of  the  national  temple,  and  the 
splendour  with  which  he  executed  the  blessed  work  far  ex- 
ceeded the  modest  dignity  with  which  his  staid  predecessors 
had  proposed  to  invest  the  edifice.  Plutarch  had  himself 
seen  lying  at  Athens  columns  of  bright  Pentelic  marble,  of 
exquisite  proportions,  which  were  brought  to  Rome,  and 
there,  as  he  complains,  chiselled,  scraped  and  polished,  and 
reduced  to  an  ungraceful  slenderness.  The  ornamentation 
of  the  edifice  was  of  the  most  lavish  character.1 2  The  gilding 
of  the  bronze  tiles  Avith  which  it  was  covered  was  the  gift  of 
Domitian ; the  estimate  we  have  received  of  its  amount,  even 
if  we  include  in  it  the  gilding  of  the  bases  and  capitals  of  the 
pillars,  and  of  the  innumerable  statues  which  crowded  the 
precincts,  exceeds  belief. 3 But  the  restoration  of  the  Capi- 

1 Suet.  Domit.  8. 

2 Plutarch.  Poplic.  15.  ol  Se  doves  . . . kv  ry  '’SufiyirXriyevTes  avdis 
nai  avagvoSevTes,  oil  tooovtov  hsxov  y?&<pvpias  ocov  aieit'Xecav  avp/xerpias,  Trepa 
tov  naXov  Staicevoc  nal  A ayapol  <j>avevres. 

3 Plutarch  assures  us  that  the  gilding,  $ xpverucns,  amounted  to  12,000 
talents,  which,  according  to  the  ordinary  computation  of  about  200?.  to  the 
talent,  would  amount  to  2,400,000?.,  and  says  that  this  immense  sum  exceeded 
any  private  fortune  at  Rome.  Stilicho,  at  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  cen- 
tury, stripped  the  doors  of  some  of  their  gold  plating ; and  Genseric,  in  the 
sack  of  Rome,  453,  carried  off  further  spoils  from  the  Capitol ; but  the  gild- 
ing of  the  roof  continued  for  many  centuries  to  be  a conspicuous  ornament  of 


118 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


rA.  D.  81. 


tol  was  not  the  only  monument  of  Domitian’s  piety.  The 
recent  fire  had  left  many  sacred  sites  desolate,  both  on  the 
Capitoline  and  in  the  Campus.  Augustus  might  have  led  the 
way ; but  he  would  have  required  his  wealthy  nobles  to  fol- 
low ; and  many  of  them  would  have  competed  gallantly  with 
him  in  the  display  of  patriotism  and  liberality.  Such  times 
were  now  past.  The  shrunken  revenues  of  the  magnates  of 
Rome  could  not  vie  with  the  fiscus  of  the  emperor,  nor  could 
the  nobles  even  modestly  imitate  them  prince’s  generosity. 
Domitian  had  no  Agrippa,  no  Pollio,  no  Maecenas,  no  Taurus, 
to  erect  temples  for  the  gods,  or  halls,  theatres,  and  baths  for 
the  public.  The  universal  patron  was  Caesar.  Several  build- 
ings, both  religious  and  secular,  were  restored  or  constructed 
by  Domitian ; among  them  a temple  of  Minerva  in  the  Cam- 
pus, and  another  in  the  Forum  Transitorium,  a temple  of  Isis 
and  Serapis,  to  wFich  we  may  add  a restoration  or  repair  of 
the  Pantheon.  The  Diribitorium,  the  great  hall  of  Agrippa, 
which  boasted  a roof  of  the  widest  span  in  the  ancient  world, 
had  suffered  in  the  fire  of  Titus,  and  the  second  century  of 
the  empire  lacked  skill  or  energy  to  cover  it  again.1  This, 
however,  seems  to  have  been  the  only  instance  of  acknowl- 
edged inferiority.  On  the  contrary,  from  this  time  forward 
the  emperors  continued  to  adorn  the  city  with  new  works, 
the  size  and  splendour  of  which  increased  with  every  genera- 
tion ; but  these  were  the  works  of  the  emperors  only. 

But  with  all  his  zeal  for  the  honour  of  the  national  divini- 
ties, the  chief  of  the  Roman  people  could  not  fail  to  remark 
Ascription  of  that  none  of  their  deities  was  so  present  to  their 
charactoto  niinds  as  an  object  of  regard  and  veneration,  as 
Domitian.  the  person  of  the  prince  himself,  their  august  pa- 
tron and  protector.  A feeling  of  mysterious  awe  attached 


t’ue  city,  and  contributed  to  give  her  the  name  “ Urbs  aurea,”  which  she  re- 
tained late  into  the  middle  ages.  Gregorovius,  Gesch.  der  Sladt  Rom  im  Mitte- 
lalter,  i.  41. 

1 Dion,  lxv.  8. : fyv  tie  ohcoq  peytCToq  tuv  Traurdre  piav  opoiprjv  ix^vrov"  vim 
yao  tJ$,  rf/q  orkyijQ  avrov  Kada/peOelayg,  bn  ovu  ijSvvjjOr]  avdiq  cvoTijvat,  axavift 
tori. 


A.  U.  834.; 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


119 


to  the  living  principle  which  seemed  to  animate  the  conduct 
of  human  affair’s  from  the  centre  to  the  circumference  of  the 
empire,  and  this  feeling  was  easily  lost  in  religious  devotion 
to  the  visible  chief  of  the  state.  Domitian  followed  the  bias 
of  the  times  in  sanctioning  more  openly  than  hitherto  the 
outward  expression  of  Csesar-worship.  The  recognition  of 
his  father  and  brother  as  divinities,  already  cordially  ac- 
cepted, made  it  scarcely  possible  to  distinguish  the  nature 
of  the  dead  and  the  living  members  of  the  same  celestial 
house.  No  other  emperor  had  succeeded  to  an  actual  father 
and  brother.  No  other  emperor  except  Titus  himself  had 
even  descended  directly  from  a deified  ancestor.1 *  Accord- 
ingly the  notion  of  Domitian’s  participation,  even  while  yet 
alive,  in  the  divine  nature,  was  instinctively  admitted  by  the 
vague  superstitious  feelings  of  the  people.  It  was  the  pleas- 
ure, and  still  more  the  interest  of  courtiers  and  parasites  to 
foster  and  exaggerate  this  feeling ; but  even  Statius  and 
Martial  generally  confine  themselves  to  oblique  insinuations, 
and  leave  the  direct  inference  to  the  reader’s  imagination. 
Domitian  had  thronged  the  narrow  precincts  of  the  Capito- 
line  hill  with  statues  of  himself,  which  thus  jostling  the  most 
venerable  images  of  the  national  ends,  challenged  the  wor- 
ship  of  the  devotees  of  Jupiter.  And  so  the  poets  contrived 
to  mingle  the  idea  of  the  emperor  as  Ruler,  Father,  Tarpeian 
and  Capitoline,  with  that  of  the  Greatest  and  Best  of  beings, 
who  was  adored  under  the  same  appellations.  They  de- 
scribed his  statues  as  eternal,  a pretty  strong  intimation  that 
he  was  eternal  himself.  They  styled  his  works,  his  exploits, 
his  verses  divine,  a pretty  clear  avowal  of  the  divinity  which 
was  supposed  to  animate  their  author.3  Still  the  emperor 
refrains  from  claiming  divine  honours.  While  he  allows 
victims  to  be  slaughtered  before  his  statues,  and  even  the 
beasts  which  were  driven  towards  the  temples  to  be  stopped 
on  the  way  and  sacrificed  to  his  own  images,  while  he  raises 

1 Plin.  Panegyr.  11.:  “ Vespasianum  Titus,  Titum  Domitianus  (dicavit 

ccelo) ; sed  ille  ut  Dei  films,  hie  ut  frater  videretur.” 

5 Martial,  v.  5. : “ Ad  Capitolini  coelestia  earmina  belli.” 


120 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


LA.  D.  81. 


to  heaven  not  only  his  brother,  who  had  worn  the  purple, 
but  his  infant  child,  who  had  attained  to  no  popular  venera- 
tion, he  abstains  from  erecting  a temple  to  himself,  or  placing 
his  own  altar  by  the  side  of  the  altars  of  the  Flavian  divini- 
ties.1 If,  however,  it  was  only  under  the  veil  of  a rhetorical 
figure  that  the  citizens  might  claim  to  address  their  ruler  as 
God,  they  professed  to  be  delighted  at  the  sense  and  natural 
piety  of  strangers,  who  were  scared  by  no  conventional 
scruples  from  the  simple  effusion  of  their  enthusiastic  adora- 
tion.3 If  Domitian  is  not  a god  in  the  abstract,  he  is  at  least 
as  a god  to  the  Romans.8  The  government  of  the  terrestrial 
globe  is  a delegation  from  the  Powers  of  Olympus  to  the 
Power  of  Rome,  while  yet  he  lives  the  life  of  a man  among 
men.4  Domitian  and  his  consort  represent  to  Roman  eyes 
the  Ausonian  Jupiter  and  Juno.6  The  object  of  all  this 
flattery  favoured  the  illusion  with  deliberate  affectation 

1 Thus  Dion  expressly  declares  that  no  temple,  even  in  his  day,  had  been 
raised  to  a living  emperor  in  Rome  or  Italy,  to  no  emperor,  at  least,  “ of  any 
consideration : ” k<j>’  dnocrovovv  Pidyov  rivbg  agiov,  as  if  to  exclude  Caligula. 
Dion,  li.  20.  The  only  child  of  Domitian  (born  a.  d.  82,  Euseb.  Chronic.), 
which  died  in  infancy,  appears  on  coins  as  “ divus  Aug.  fil.”  Comp.  Sil.  ItaL 
iii.  629. : “ Siderei  juxta  radiabunt  tempora  nati ; ” and  Stat.  Sylv.  i.  1.  97. : 

“ Ibit  in  amplexus  natus,  fraterque,  paterque, 

Et  soror  ; una  locum  cervix  dabit  omnibus  astris  ; ” 
from  which  it  would  appear  that  a sister  had  been  canonized  also.  Comp.  Suet. 
Vesp.  3. : Gruter,  ccclxvi.  4. 

2 Martial,  v.  3.  on  the  adoration  of  the  Dacian  Degis. 

3 Martial,  vii.  Si.  : unostri  mente  calens  Dei.”  Quintil.  Inst.  Oral.  iv. 
procem. 

4 Statius,  Sylv.  v.  i.  37. : 

“ Notat  ista  Deus  qui  flectit  habenas 
Orbis,  et  humanos  propior  Jove  digerit  actus.” 

6 Statius,  Sylv.  iii.  4.  18.:  “Jupiter  Ausonius,  pariter  Romanaque  Juno,” 
Comp.  Martial,  ix.  37.:  “Phryx  puer  allerim  gaudia  nota  Jovis.”  Both  Au- 
gustus and  Tiberius  had  been  represented  in  statues  and  cameos  as  the  earthly 
Jupiter.  See  Mongez,  Icon.  Horn.  pi.  19,  22,  26.  Muller,  Denkmaler  dev 
alien  Kunst , p.  47,  60.  So  Germanicus  and  Agrippina  appear  in  cameo  as  Trip- 
tolemus  and  Ceres,  Livia  as  Cybele.  Possibly  all  these  are  provincial  symbol- 
isms. 


A.U.  834.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


121 


When  he  took  hack  his  wife  after  the  divorce,  he  declared 
that  he  had  restored  her,  not  to  his  pillow,  as  a mortal  might 
say,  hut  to  his  sacred  cushion ; he  encouraged  the  mob  of 
the  theatres  to  hail  him  and  the  empress  as  Our  Lord  and 
Lady  / and,  finally,  he  suffered  his  procurator  to  style  him, 
in  a public  document,  Our  Lord  and  God.  The  daring 
phrase  was  eagerly  caught  up  and  popularly  repeated.1 

It  was,  no  doubt,  a pleasant  conceit  of  Martial’s,  that 
when  Domitian  replaced  the  head  of  a colossal  Hercules 
with  his  own  celestial  countenance,  the  jealousy  disrespect  to 
of  Juno  was  at  last  appeased  by  the  happy  meta-  {^e\tSPas°Mas- 
morphosis.  But  these  pretensions  to  divinity,  Phern-y- 
whether  received  in  earnest,  or  handled  in  joke,  led  naturally 
to  a terrible  consequence.  Every  act  which  could  be  con- 
strued into  disrespect  to  the  prince  became,  when  viewed 
through  this  fatal  medium,  impiety  and  sacrilege.  Thus,  an 
unfortunate  citizen,  who  complained,  in  the  amphitheatre, 
of  the  emperor’s  partiality  to  one  of  the  combatants,  was 
seized  and  thrown  into  the  arena  for  blasphemy.2  The  case 
is  all  the  worse,  if,  as  seems  too  probable,  the  common  feel- 
ing of  the  spectators  assented  to  this  arbitrary  interpretation. 
But  the  consciousness,  no  doubt,  of  their  self-degradation 
made  the  Roman  people  as  jealous  of  one  another  as  was 
their  master  of  them.  The  slaves  of  Domitian  could  not 
bear  that  any  of  their  fellow  men  should  walk  erect  and 
independent.  We  may  remark  how  differently  certain  creeds 
and  cults  were  now  regarded,  on  which  the  popular  theology 
might  be  expected  to  look  with  equal  jealousy.  Isis  and 
Cybele  became  henceforth  fully  naturalized  at  Cult  of  Isis 
Rome;  they  were  accepted  as  allies  of  the  indi-  at 

genous  divinities,  with  whom  they  were  content  Iiome- 
to  exercise  a divided  sovereignty.3  The  charges  of  effemi- 

1 Suet.  Dorrdt.  13.  Comp  Martial,  viii.  2.  6. ; Aurel.  Victor,  Cces.  11. ; 
Dion,  lxvii.  13. ; Eutrop.  vii.  23. 

2 Suet.  Lomit.  10. : Comp.  Zonar.  Ann.  si.  19. ; yw-ij  Tiq  on  evavrlov  eh<6vo( 
avTo v aneSvcaro  ttpoveWq. 

3 The  worship  of  Isis  and  Serapis  was  established  about  this  period  at 

121 


122 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  81. 


nacy  and  vice,  once  so  justly  made  against  their  votaries, 
were  at  least  tacitly  withdrawn.  But  the  freedom  and  inde- 
pendence of  Judaism,  respected  by  a manlier  aye, 

Judaism  more  1 J 

than  ever  of-  and  favoured  by  more  magnanimous  Caesars,  re- 
buked the  lifeless  superstitions  of  the  declining 
empire,  and  offended  the  vanity  of  a Domitian.  The  politi- 
cal self-assertion  of  the  Jews  had  been  sufficiently  crushed, 
at  least  for  a season ; the  nation  was,  to  all  appearance, 
effectually  subdued ; but  its  opinions  survived,  and  perme- 
ated the  veins  and  arteries  even  of  Italy  herself.  With  the 
destruction  of  their  temple  and  the  abolition  of  their  ritual 
observances,  the  metaphysical  dogmas  of  the  Jews  would 
appear  more  mysterious  than  ever  to  a people  whose  religion 
was  almost  wholly  absorbed  in  the  external  and  the  sensuous. 
Judea , says  Lucan,  adores  some  unknown , undiscovered 
deity  ; but  fifty  years  later,  Juvenal  reproaches  the  followers 
of  Moses  with  worshipping  nought  but  the  clouds  and  the 
sky-god,  while  they  made  a traffic  of  their  superstitious 
dreams.1  In  the  time  of  ISTero,  Seneca  could  say  of  them, 
that,  though  conquered  they  gave  laws  to  their  conqueror  f 
so  firmly  had  they  established  themselves  in  the  world’s 
capital,  so  deeply  had  they  impressed  their  ideas  on  every 

Rome,  according  to  the  statement  of  Tertullian,  Apol.  6. ; and  Gibbon  (c  2.) 
naturally  supposes  that  it  owed  this  favour  to  the  gratitude  of  the  Flavian 
family.  Hence  Statius  addresses  Isis  with  the  utmost  respect  as  Queen  of 
Egypt  and  Goddess  of  the  East : 

“ Isi,  Phoroneis  quondam  stabulata  sub  antris, 

Nunc  regina  Phari,  numenque  Orientis  anheli,  .... 

....  Marti  juvenem,  Dea,  trade  Latino.” — Sylv.  iii.  2.  110. 

But  the  emperor  Otho  had  already  patronized  this  foreign  cult,  and  had  publicly 
sonducted  its  ceremonies  in  the  linen  vestments  of  the  Isiac  priesthood.  Suet. 
Olho,  12. 

1 Lucan,  ii.  592. : “ dedita  sacris  Incerti  Judaea  dei.” 

Juvenal,  xiv.  97. : “Nil  prater  nubes,  et  coeli  numen  adorant,” 
vi.  547. : “ Qualiacunque  voles  Judsei  somnia  vendunt.” 

* Seneca,  in  a fragment  quoted  by  S.  Augustin,  de  Civ.  Dei , vi.  11. : “ usque 
eo  sceleratissimae  gentis  consuetudo  convaluit,  ut  per  omnes  jam  terras  recepta 
sit : victi  victoribus  leges  dederunt.” 


L.  0.  834.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


123 


class  of  the  citizens,  snch  a demand  had  they  created  for  the 
stimulus  they  could  administer  to  the  jaded  imaginations 
of  both  women  and  men.  From  the  time  of  Caesar  down- 
wards, the  Jews  had  thrust  themselves  into  every  Roman 
society,  and  not  least  into  the  highest.  They  had  been 
favoured  by  princes,  courted  by  princes’  freedmen ; ministers 
had  flattered  them,  matrons  had  caressed  them.  A Jewish 
potentate  had  moulded  the  character  of  the  emperor  Caius  ; 
a Jewish  princess  had  enslaved  the  passions  of  the  emperor 
Titus;  a Jewish  dancer  had  enchanted  alike  the  empress,  the 
senators,  and  the  populace.  Many  citizens  of  every  rank 
had  more  or  less  openly  addicted  themselves  to  Jewish 
usages  and  tenets,  and  when  a Jewish  sect  ventured  to  trans- 
fer its  obedience  from  the  law  of  Moses  to  the  Gospel  of 
Jesus  Christ,  the  number  of  its  adherents  in  the  capital  of 
the  empire  would  seem  to  have  embraced  Jews,  Greeks,  and 
Romans  in  nearly  equal  proportions. 

Between  these  two  branches  of  the  same  stem  there 
reigned  a deep  antagonism,  in  which  the  government  and 
the  mass  at  least  of  the  Roman  people  took  no 

. „T1  , . , , 1 Hostile  atti- 

mterest.  VV  hen  the  jealousy  ot  the  government  tudeofthe 

. , . , _ . . government 

was  excited  agamst  the  Jews,  indignant  both  at  towards  Ju- 
their  turbulence  and  their  proselytizing  spirit,  ing  Christian- 
they  might  involve  the  Christians  in  the  com-  Uy’ 
mon  charge,  or  might,  perhaps,  divert  it  from  themselves 
upon  their  rivals.  When,  however,  after  the  great  Jewish 
war,  that  jealousy  was  converted  into  settled  hostility,  both 
the  Jews  and  the  Christians  would  be  placed  under  the  same 
ban,  and  if  the  sword  was  retained  in  its  scabbard,  they 
would  be  sternly  forbidden  to  exercise  their  spiritual  influ- 
ence upon  the  citizens  around  them,  or  receive  converts  from 
the  national  religion  into  their  ranks.  Their  ex-  modcrated  by 
emption  at  this  period  from  actual  persecution  the  Jew5unt  °f 
might  be  secured  by  the  demand  that  was  made  tribute- 
upon  them  for  tribute.  Both  Jews  and  Christians,  undis- 
tinguished by  the  Roman  government,  were  required  to  pay 
the  double  drachma,  according  to  Yespasian’s  enactment, 


L 24 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.D.  81. 


and  if  the  Christians  exclaimed  against  being  thus  confound- 
ed with  a religion  which  they  really  renounced,  those  at  least 
among  them  who  were  of  Jewish  extraction  would  be  traced 
by  the  national  token  of  circumcision.1 2  Suetonius  has  re- 
corded an  instance  of  the  harshness  with  which  this  inqui- 
sition was  enforced,  and  it  seems  possible  that  the  old  man 
of  ninety,  who  was  required  to  uncover,  and  convicted  of 
Judaism  in  spite  of  his  own  denial,  was  in  fact  a Jewish 
convert  to  Christianity.3 

While,  however,  sectarians  of  Jewish  birth  were  tolerated 
for  the  sake  of  their  contributions  to  the  treasury,  Domitian, 
as  a champion  of  religion,  affected  great  indignation  against 
the  conversion  of  citizens  to  any  form  of  Jewish  manners 
_ „ . or  doctrine.  When,  at  a later  period,  the  Pa- 

Charge  of  1m-  # 7 A> 

piety  and  jew-  gan  conservatives  sought  to  propitiate  the  gods 

isli  manners  0 x 0 

against  citizens  who  seemed  to  abandon  them,  they  held  up  the 
of  rank.  , . , * , . 

Christians  to  popular  odium  as  atheists ; but  this 
was  a charge  never  brought  specifically  against  the  Jews.3 
Nevertheless,  both  Jews  and  Christians  might  be  branded  as 
impious  in  the  Roman  sense,  that  is,  as  cleniers  of  the  Roman 

1 There  seems  to  be  a reference  to  the  Christians  in  the  words  of  Suetonius, 
Domit.  12. : “ deferebantur  qui  vel  improfessi  Judaieam  viverent  vitam,  vel 
dissimulate  origine  imposita  genti  tributa  non  pependissent.”  As  soon,  how- 
ever, as  the  Christians  established  their  independence  of  Judaism,  they  fell 
under  the  ban  of  an  illicit  religion. 

2 Suet.  Domit.  1.  c. : “prater  cjeteros  Judaicus  fiscus  acerbissime  actus 

est interfuisse  me  adolescentulum  memini,  quum  a procuratore, 

frequentisshnoque  concilio,  inspiceretur  nonagenarius  senex  an  circumsectus 
esset.”  The  tribute  of  the  didpaxpov  continued  in  force  in  the  third  century 
(Origen,  Ep.  ad  Africanum) ; nor  do  I find  that  there  was  any  actual  persecu- 
tion of  the  Jews  during  that  period.  There  exists  a rescript  of  Antoninus  Pius 
forbidding  a Roman  lady  to  bequeath  money  to  the  Jewish  Society  at  Antioch, 
Cod.  Justin,  i.  9. ; and  Severus,  after  a revolt  in  Palestine,  issued  an  interdict 
against  conversions,  apparently  in  the  East. 

£ Milman,  Hist,  of  Christianity,  ii.  61.  The  charge  of  “atheism”  was 
brought  against  the  Christians  in  the  third  century,  as  we  read  in  Minucius 
Felix,  in  Tertullian,  Origen,  and  Lucian.  No  such  accusation  is  advanced  by 
Tacitus  or  Pliny.  It  was  the  last  refuge  of  declining  Paganism,  and  showed  a 
fear  of  Christianity  which  had  never  been  excited  by  Judaism. 


A.  U.  831.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


125 


divinities,  and  as  tempting  men  to  withdraw  from  their  ser- 
vice. This  charge  of  'Impiety  was,  it  seems,  now  advanced 
against  many  persons  of  rank  in  the  city,  and  combined  with 
that  of  neglecting  the  duties  of  a citizen ; and  to  this  was 
added  the  kindred  charge  of  adopting  Jewish  manners.1 
Whether  these  culprits  were  guilty  of  Judaism  or  of  Christi- 
anity it  seems  impossible  to  determine.  If  I lean  to  the 
latter  interpretation,  it  is  because  Judaism  seems  to  have  lost 
at  this  time  almost  all  its  attraction  in  Roman  eyes,  and,  as 
the  creed  of  a conquered  and  degraded  people,  lay  under  the 
ban  of  ill-success,  which,  with  Pagan  inquirers,  would  be 
deemed  fatal  to  its  pretensions.2  Among  these  inquirers, 
however,  there  would  be  some  accurate  knowledge  of  the 
difference  between  Judaism  and  Christianity,  and  while  the 
government  and  the  historians  writing  from  official  records 
would  confound  them  carelessly  together,  I can  believe  that 
the  new  faith  was  at  this  time  making  real  progress  among 
the  higher  ranks  of  society,  and  assuming  in  some  degree,  in 
spite  of  the  disabilities  under  which  it  lay,  the  position  held 
in  an  earlier  generation  by  the  old. 

Nevertheless,  assuming  this  probability,  we  are  still  as 
far  as  ever  from  fathoming  the  real  motives  of  the  tyrant 
for  the  proscription  with  which,  in  the  fifteenth  proscription  of 
year  of  his  reign,  he  visited  some  of  his  highest  onbthi?cSrge, 
nobles,  and  among  them  some  of  his  own  nearest  A- D- 95- 
kindred.  The  first  charge  might  be  that  of  impiety  and 
Judaism;  but,  besides  these  crimes,  Acilius  Gla-  AcaiasGla. 
brio,  lately  consul,  was  accused  of  the  high  mis-  bri0- 
demeanor  of  having  fought  with  beasts  in  the  amphitheatre, 
an  act  which  savours  little  of  a Christian  or  even  of  a Jew- 
ish professor.3  Flavius  Clemens  was  first  cousin  to  Domitian, 

1 Dion,  lxvii.  14. : emjvexdi]  6e  appdiv  kyiiXjjfia  adeSrprog,  vp’  tjq  Kal  aXXoi 
eg  rd  tgiv  ’I ovdaluv  ffirj  k^oKeXXovreg  ttoaXo!  KarediKacdTjaav. 

2 Of  the  contempt  into  which  Judaism  seems  to  have  fallen  at  this  time  at 
Rome,  I shall  have  occasion  to  speak  hereafter. 

3 Dion,  L c. : tov  de  Si)  YXabpiuva  ....  Karrpj'oprjdkvTa  ra  re  aXXa  ola 
Kal  ol  ttoXXoi,  Kal  oti  Kal  /&t]pioig  kjuaxsro,  icarkKTeivev.  Acilius  Glabrio,  the 
younger  of  two  nobles  of  Domitian’s  court,  was  consul,  a.  d.  93. 


126 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  81. 


being  the  son  of  Vespasian’s  brother,  Sabinus,  and  was  mar- 
ried to  Domitian’s  niece,  Domitilla.  He  had 

Flavins  Clem  . . 

ensandDo-  stood  high  in  the  emperors  favour.  His  two 

mitilla.  . jr  , . . , 

sons,  who  had  received  the  auspicious  names  ox 
Vespasianus  and  Domitianus,  had  been  placed  by  the  em- 
peror himself  under  the  tuition  of  the  favourite  rhetorician, 
Quintilian,  and  were  destined,  as  all  believed,  to  the  imperial 
succession,1  Suddenly  the  Romans  learnt,  with  consterna- 
tion, that  this  illustrious  scion  of  the  reigning  family  was 
arrested  and  convicted  of  the  crime  of  Judaizing,  to  which 
was  added  a vague  charge  of  withdrawing  from  the  civil,  or, 
perhaps,  from  the  religious  duties  of  a citizen.  Acilius  was 
convicted  and  degraded  to  the  arena,  and,  when  he  came  off 
victorious  in  the  combat,  was  sent  into  exile,  and  promptly 
despatched  there.  Clemens  was  sentenced  at  once  to  death 
and  executed ; and  his  consort  was  banished  to  an  island. 
Of  their  children  we  hear  no  further : possibly  they  suffered 
with  their  parents.  The  proscription  extended  to  many 
other  personages  of  distinction,  whose  names  are  not  re- 
corded, who  seem  to  have  been  generally  banished,  and  who, 
after  the  death  of  the  tyrant,  were  recalled  among  other  sur- 
viving victims  by  his  successor.2  This  proscription  took 
place  about  eight  months  before  Domitian’s  death,  at  a period 
when  he  was  tormented  by  the  utmost  jealousy  of  all  around, 
and  when  his  heart  was  hardened  to  acts  of  unparalleled 
barbarity ; 3 and  it  seems  more  likely  that  it  was  counselled 


1 Suet.  Dornit.  15.  Quintil.  Inst.  Oral,  prooem.  iv. : Suetonius  applies  to 
Clemens  the  stigma,  “ contemptissimse  inerti®,”  though  he  had  just  been  consuL 
The  phrase  seems  to  refer  to  neglect  of  Roman  usages  and  social  prescriptions, 
which  it  was  more  and  more  difficult  to  enforce  upon  the  higher  ranks  of 
citizens.  It  is  apparently  the  same  as  the  “ publica  circa  bonas  artes  socordia  ” 
of  Tacitus,  Annal.  xi.  15.,  and  is  not  to  be  restricted  to  the  evasion  of  political 
duties. 

2 Tertullian  states  that  the  exiled  Christians  were  recalled  by  Domitian 
himself,  Apolog.  5. ; but  this  is  contradicted  by  Eusebius,  Eccl.  Hist.  iii.  20,, 
and  seems  in  itself  improbable.  Comp.  Oros.  vii.  11. 

3 The  exact  date  is  thus  ascertained : Clemens  was  consul,  a.  d.  95,  and 
gave  his  name  to  the  year  , but  Domitian  put  him  to  death,  according  to  Sue- 


A..U.  834.1 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


127 


by  abject  fear  for  his  own  person  or  power,  than  by  concern 
for  the  religious  interests  of  the  state,  however  sincere  he 
may  once  have  been  in  his  zeal  for  the  honour  of 

d Alleged  pcrse- 

the  gods.  We  must  be  content  to  draw  the  veil  cation  of  the 
again  over  this  slight  and  dubious  glimpse  of  the 
precarious  state  of  the  Christians  under  Domitian,  which 
has  been  too  hastily  dignified  with  the  name  of  a persecu- 
tion.1 

If  Domitian  was  a precisian  in  religious  affairs,  not  less 
did  he  carry  the  spirit  of  discipline  into  the  administration 
of  the  laws.  This  branch  of  government,  after 

• • -TNi  t it  -Domitian  en- 

excitins:  the  feverish  activity  of  Claudius,  had  courages  the 
— * * delators 

been  entirely  neglected  by  Nero,  and  Vespasian 
was  to  the  last  too  much  of  a blunt  soldier  to  undertake  a 
duty  requiring  tact  and  subtilty.  Domitian  had  the  train- 
ing of  a civilian,  and  his  temper  was  inclined  to  chicane. 
His  edicts  and  rescripts  were  issued  in  restless  haste,  and 
seem  to  have  obtained  little  respect  from  posterity.  But  his 

tonius  : “ tantum  non  in  ipso  ejus  consulatu ; ” therefore,  immediately  after  the 
termination  of  the  year,  or  at  the  commencement  of  96.  Domitian  himself 
perished  in  the  middle  of  September  of  that  year. 

1 The  ecclesiastical  tradition  of  St.  John’s  miraculous  preservation  from  the 
boiling  oil  (Tertull.  de  Prescript.  Hard.  86.)  has  no  historical  value,  though 
we  may  give  full  credit  to  the  statement  of  Irenasus,  that  the  last  of  the  Apos- 
tles was  living  almost  at  the  close  of  the  first  Christian  century.  The  Flavian 
persecution  is  claimed  by  Tertullian,  Lactantius,  Orosius,  and  Eusebius ; but 
on  no  other  grounds  than  those  stated  in  the  text.  Eusebius  gives,  indeed, 
an  interesting  story  from  Hegesippus,  which  may  have  some  foundation  in  fact, 
in  reference  to  the  inquiries  instituted  by  Vespasian,  and  continued,  no  doubt 
by  his  successors,  into  all  Jewish  claims  to  the  royal  succession  of  David.  The 
sons  of  Judas,  “ the  brother  of  our  Lord,”  were  called  before  Domitian.  He 
demanded  whether  they  descended  from  David.  They  confessed  it.  Again 
he  inquired  what  were  their  means.  They  declared  that  they  possessed  but 
9000  denarii,  and  a few  acres  of  land.  They  showed  him  their  hands,  hard 
with  daily  toil,  in  token  of  the  simple  industry  by  which  they  gained  their 
living.  Once  more  the  emperor  asked,  what  was  the  meaning  of  Christ’s 
kingdom  ; to  which  they  replied  that  it  was  not  of  this  world,  but  should  ap- 
pear at  the  consummation  of  all  things.  Domitian,  it  is  said,  was  satisfied 
with  these  answers,  and,  it  is  added,  put  a stop  from  that  moment  to  the  perse- 
cutions of  the  Christians.  Hist.  Eccl.  1.  c. 


128 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  81. 


personal  diligence  almost  equalled  that  of  Claudius,  and  was, 
no  doubt,  beneficial  to  bis  people.  Nor  must  we  let  ourselves 
speak  with  disrespect  of  the  vigilance,  however  often  ill-di- 
rected, with  which  he  superintended  the  procedure  of  the 
magistrates  in  Rome,  and  throughout  the  provinces.1 2  Never 
were  so  many  had  judges  and  corrupt  governors  brought  to 
justice;  hut  the  vigilance  of  the  prince  in  his  solitary  watch- 
tower  would  have  availed  little,  had  he  not  employed  the 
eyes  of  a legion  of  informers.  At  the  commencement  of  his 
principate,  Domitian  had  trodden  carefully  in  the  steps  of 
his  predecessor  in  repudiating  and  proscribing  such  vile 
services.  He  had  expressed  his  abhorrence  of  them  in  a 
sentence  which  was  carefully  recorded  by  the  historians : 
The  prince  who  does  not  repress  delation , encourages  it?  But 
the  necessities  of  his  own  policy  undermined  this  indignant 
virtue.  The  same  ruler  who  punished  the  delators  of  Nero 
fostered  a similar  brood  without  scruple  in  his  own  interest. 
The  distinction  between  the  delator  and  the  legitimate  ac- 
cuser was  accurately  drawn,  and  it  will  be  well  to  hear  it  in 
mind  to  understand  clearly  the  crime  so  often  urged  against 
the  emperors.3  In  civil  cases,  particularly  in  those  relating 
to  the  collection  of  the  public  dues,  the  government  em- 
ployed its  own  servants  for  the  discovery  and  prosecution 
of  defaulters.  It  was  the  business  of  the  advocatus  jisci 
thus  to  watch  over  the  interests  of  the  imperial  revenues. 
But  the  officious  zeal  of  irregular  spies,  though  often  really 
encouraged,  was  always  professedly  denounced,  and  such 
information  given  by  slaves  against  their  masters  was  re- 
pudiated with  especial  horror.  In  criminal  cases  the  right 
of  accusation  was  legally  restricted  to  certain  near  relations, 
and  the  interference  of  a mere  stranger  was  unauthorized 
delation.  The  legitimate  pursuer,  however,  might  enrploy 
an  advocate,  who  stept  into  his  place  and  became  his  repre- 
sentative The  provinces  might  thus  employ  a patron  at 

1 Suet.  Domit.  8. ; Victor,  Epit.  11. 

2 Suet.  Domit.  9. ; Comp.  Dion,  Ixvii.  1. 

8 Cod.  Justin,  ix.  1.,  x.  11. 


A.  U.  834.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


129 


Rome  to  accuse,  in  their  name,  their  delinquent  prefect ; or 
the  senate  might  itself  appoint  an  advocate  or  accuser,  as 
was  often  done  in  cases  of  public  crime,  particularly  in  cases 
of  majesty.  But  the  senator  who,  unemployed  and  unap- 
pointed, came  forward  of  his  own  accord  to  accuse,  was 
branded  as  a delator,  and  was  deemed  to  transgress  law  and 
usage,  as  well  as  to  violate  the  confidence  which  ought  to 
reign  among  the  members  of  a privileged  order.1  The  diffi- 
culty in  which  the  emperors  were  placed  will  he  easily  seen. 
Constrained  as  they  were  to  veil  the  extent  and  foundation 
of  their  power,  and  to  court,  instead  of  demanding  the  obedi- 
ence and  homage  of  their  subjects,  cases  constantly  occurred 
in  which  it  was  essential  to  their  safety  that  their  supremacy 
should  be  vindicated,  while  it  was  impossible  for  them  to 
come  forward  openly  and  demand  protection  and  satisfaction. 
Firmly  to  reject  the  proffered  assistance  of  the  voluntary  de- 
lator required  an  amount  of  self-restraint  and  self-confidence 
which  few  men  in  such  a position  could  boast ; least  of  all 
one  who  was  conscious  of  his  own  demerits,  and  of  the  un- 
popularity with  which  he  had  surrounded  himself.  With 
conspirators  in  the  senate,  in  the  forum,  in  the  camp,  even  in 
his  own  household,  with  a whole  people  constantly  on  the 
watch  for  the  evil  auguries  of  the  soothsayers,  the  most 
trifling  marks  of  disrespect  might  cause  deep  uneasiness, 
and  the  means  of  indirect  repression,  through  the  agency  of 
the  delator,  must  be  accepted  as  a necessary  weapon  of 
defence. 

But  the  necessity  for  the  use  of  this  fatal  weapon  grew 
with  its  exercise.  Domitian  seems,  of  all  the  emperors,  to 
have  carried  it  furthest,  and  adopted  it  most  sys-  Character  of 
tematically.  It  was  an  aggravation  rather  than  the  delators- 
an  extenuation  of  his  crime  that  he  seduced  into  his  service 

1 Hence  tlie  use  of  the  phrase  : “ sponte  accusasse  ” to  mark  the  enormity 
of  the  delator.  Of  Silius  Italieus,  Pliny  says,  JEpist.  iii.  7. : “ l®serat  famam 
suam  sub  Nerone ; credebatur  sponte  accusasse.”  On  the  other  hand,  he  is 
careful  to  let  his  correspondents  know  that  in  his  own  public  accusations  he 
was  appointed  by  the  senate.  TSp.  vii.  33. 


130 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  SI, 


men  of  high  rank  and  character,  and  turned  the  senate  into 
a mob  of  rivals  for  the  disgrace  of  thus  basely  serving  him. 
The  instruments  of  his  jealous  precaution  rose  in  a gradu- 
ated hierarchy.  The  knights  and  senators  trembled  before  a 
Massa  Baebius,  a Cams,  and  a Latinus ; but  these  delators 
trembled  in  their  turn  before  the  prince  of  delators,  Memmius 
Regulus,  and  courted  him,  not  always  successfully,  by  the 
surrender  of  their  estates  or  their  mistresses.  A school  of 
high  prerogative  lawyers  speedily  arose  to  humour  the  em- 
peror’s legal  tastes,  and  to  invent  a justification  for  every 
sentence  it  might  please  him  to  pronounce.  Men  who  thus 
prostituted  their  abilities  were  found  liable,  as  might  be 
expected,  to  charges  of  gross  irregularity  in  their  own  con- 
duct. Thus  Palfurius  Sura  was  accused  of  having  descended, 
being  a consular,  into  the  arena,  to  gratify  Nero  by  wrestling 
with  a female  athlete.  When,  however,  Vespasian  struck 
his  name  from  the  roll  of  the  senate,  he  went  over  to  the 
Stoics,  set  up  for  an  austere  precisian,  and  a professed  oppo- 
nent of  the  imperial  government.1  Received  back  into  favour 
by  Domitian,  he  employed  himself  as  readily  in  building  up 
the  theory  of  imperial  prerogative.  The  men,  indeed,  who 
did  this  kind  of  work  were  sycophants;  nevertheless,  the 
work  itself  was  seasonable.  It  was  time  that  the  reality  of 
monarchy  should  be  stripped  of  its  disguises,  and  no  pretence 
left  for  the  fitful  assertion  of  an  impracticable  idea  of  liberty. 
The  long  enjoyment  of  good  and  temperate  government 
which  followed,  was  probably  in  a great  degree  owing  to  the 
naked  interpretation  of  imperial  power  put  forth  by  the 
crown  lawyers  of  Domitian.  But  some  years  of  mutual  sus- 
picion and  misunderstanding  were  still  to  be  endured  by 
prince  and  people  before  this  consummation  could  be  reached. 
The  best  and  noblest  of  the  citizens  were  still  marked  out  as 
the  prey  of  delators,  whose  patron  connived  at  enormities 

1 The  story  is  told  by  the  scholiast  on  Juvenal,  iv.  53. : 

“ Si  quid  Palfurio,  si  credimus  Armillato, 

Quicquid  conspicuum  pulcrumque  est  fequore  toto, 

Res  fisci  est,  ubicunque  natat.” 


A.  U.  834.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


131 


which  hound  their  agents  more  closely  to  himself,  and  made 
his  protection  more  necessary  to  them.  The  haughty  nobles 
quailed  in  silence  under  a system  in  which  every  act,  every 
word,  every  sigh  Avas  noted  against  them,  and  disgrace,  exile, 
and  death  followed  upon  secret  whispers.  The  fears  of  Do- 
mitian  increased  Avith  his  seArerities.  He  listened  to  the  tales 
not  of  senators  and  consulars  only,  hut  of  the  humblest  offi- 
cials, and  CA'en  of  private  soldiers.  Often,  says  Epictetus, 
was  the  citizen,  sitting  in  the  theatre,  entrapped  by  a dis- 
guised legionary  beside  him,  Avho  pretended  to  murmur 
against  the  emperor,  till  he  had  led  his  unsuspecting  neigh- 
bour to  confide  to  him  his  OAvn  complaints,  and  then  skulked 
away  to  denounce  him.1 

The  government  of  Domitian  leant  more  and  more  on  the 
soldiers.  Every  step  he  took  in  tyranny  required  to  be 
secured  by  fresh  measures  of  force  and  cruelty. 

J . . Favour  sFowd 

But  the  guardians  of  the  imperial  tyranny  might  by  Domitian  to 
at  any  moment  become  its  avengers.  It  was  ne- 
cessary to  divide  the  officers  as  well  as  to  unite  the  soldiers. 
Hence  the  jealousy  Avith  Avhich  the  imperator  kept  his  best 
lieutenants  unemployed,  or  entrusted  them  only  with  inferior 
commands.  Hence,  perhaps,  his  practice  of  dividing  the  pre- 
fecture of  the  city,  the  most  confidential  post  in  the  empire, 
among  as  many  as  twelve  colleagues.3  The  legionaries,  how- 
ever, found  themselves  humoured,  indulged,  and  pampered. 
Of  reducing  their  number  for  the  sake  of  economy  there  Avas 
no  further  mention.  They  stalked  along  the  streets  as  a 
separate  and  favoured  class,  driving  the  herd  of  citizens  to 
the  right  and  left  with  the  clang  of  their  boot-heels,  and  the 
rattling  of  their  gaudy  accoutrements.  It  concerned  the  dig- 
nity perhaps,  and  certainly  the  safety  of  the  emperor,  that 
the  bravest  of  his  subjects  should  seem  also  the  most  hon- 
oured, and  the  most  fortunate ; so  that  elevated  by  privileges, 
as  Avell  as  ornamental  distinctions,  above  the  unarmed  deni- 

1 Epictetus,  Dissert,  iy.  13. 

2 This  fact  is  stated  by  Lydus,  de  Magistratibus , i.  49.,  ii.  ] 9.  Imhof ’a 
Domilianus,  p.  100. 


132 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  I).  81 


zens  of  the  city,  they  might  share  at  least  with  their  chief 
the  envy  and  hatred  of  the  people.1  To  gain  the  confidence 
of  this  class  the  emperor  tore  himself  repeatedly  from  the 
pleasures  of  the  capital,  and  pretended  to  share  their  toils  in 
distant  campaigns.  In  Domitian  we  seem  first  to  return  to 
that  early  condition  of  society  to  which  despotism  in  civilized 
states  is  ever  tending,  when  the  chief  is  compelled  to  resume 
the  command  of  his  armies  in  person,  and  make  himself  the 
actual  leader  of  a horde  of  organized  banditi.  The  position 
to  which  this  emperor  was  first  called  was  accepted  with  in- 
creasing unreserve  by  his  successors.  In  Rome  they  solem- 
nized their  triumphs  ; in  their  Campanian  villas  they  enjoyed 
brief  snatches  of  repose ; but  it  was  on  the  frontiers  more 
and  more  that  they  reaped  the  laurels  which  attached  the 
soldiers  to  their  persons,  and  from  the  camp  that  they  issued 
more  and  more  the  decrees  by  which  they  ruled  the  world. 

Meanwhile  the  mob  of  the  city  demanded  its  accustomed 
indulgences  more  keenly  than  ever.  Domitian  lavished  on 
it  the  old  amusements  in  increased  profusion,  and 

Domitian  ca-  . , 

rcsses  the  popu-  invented  new.  k rom  year  to  year  he  squandered 
his  treasures  on  shows  and  entertainments.  His 
costly  exhibitions  displayed  with  exaggerated  features  the 
tasteless  extravagance  in  which  the  Romans  delighted.  Glad- 
iators hewed  and  hacked  one  another ; wild  beasts  tore  their 
victims ; chariots  raced  and  jostled  as  of  old  ; but  the  Flavian 
amphitheatre  afforded  a wider  arena  than  any  former  edifice, 
and  the  shows  appropriated  to  it  were  enhanced  in  grandeur 
and  extent.  The  citizens  shouted  with  admiration  at  a sea- 
fight  enacted  within  the  stone  enclosure,  the  vast  space  be- 
neath them  being  flooded  for  the  occasion  from  the  tanks  or 
fish-ponds  of  Nero’s  gardens.2  Here,  too,  women  fought 
with  women,  or  even  with  men;  an  army  of  dwarfs  was 

1 Juvenal,  xvi.  in  fin. : “ ducis  hoc  referre  videtur.” 

2 Suet.  Dom.il.  4. ; Comp.  Tit.  V.  Domitian  constructed  also  a naumachia 
Dy  the  side  of  the  Tiber : ev  iiaivu  tivi  xup'lV > says  Dion,  lxvii.  8.,  to  distin- 
guish it  from  that  of  Augustus. 


A.  U.  834.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE 


133 


marshalled  in  a combat  against  cranes.1  Domitian  added 
two  colours,  the  purple  and  the  golden,  to  the  four  factions 
of  the  circus,  and  increased  the  number  of  the  chariots  that 
dashed  in  tumultuous  fury  round  the  goal.  He  courted  popu- 
larity by  the  constancy  with  which  he  attended  these  exhibi- 
tions, which  every  citizen  of  taste  and  refinement  had  long 
pronounced  intolerably  vulgar;  but  he  preserved  his  own 
dignity  with  more  self-respect  than  some  of  his  predecessors, 
and  though  noted  for  exquisite  skill  in  some  manual  exercises, 
he  never  deigned  to  exhibit  it  in  public,  or  purchase  applause 
by  personal  degradation.2  Sometimes,  indeed,  his  caprice  or 
imperiousness  broke  through  the  restraints  of  his  self-imposed 
affability.  On  the  occasion  of  a sudden  storm  of  rain  he  re- 
fused to  allow  the  veil  of  the  amphitheatre  to  be  drawn  over 
the  spectators ; and  once,  when  the  mob  of  the  circus  dis- 
turbed him  by  their  clamour,  he  did  not  scruple  to  command 
the  herald  to  call  them  to  silence,  a bold  breach  of  etiquette 
towards  the  majesty  of  the  people.3 

While,  indeed,  the  brutal  or  senseless  amusements  of  fight- 
ing and  racing  still  enchained  the  passions  of  the  populace,  a 

more  elevated  taste  was  apparently  making;  way 

1 r . J & J Establishment 

among  a large  middle  class  of  citizens.  The  mag-  of  the  capitoi- 

„ . ine  contests  in 

nates  of  the  city  put  some  check  on  the  extrava-  singing  and 
gance  of  their  luxury,  and  their  clients  and  depend-  composltlou- 
ents  began  to  yearn  for  intellectual  recreations,  little  known 
to  the  earlier  generations.  The  moral  triumph  of  Greece  over 
her  conquerors  was  complete  on  the  day  when  the  Homan 

1 Stat.  Sylv.  i.  6-53. : 

“ Stat  sexus  rudis  insciusque  ferri, 

Et  pugnas  capit  improbus  viriles  .... 

Casuraequc  vagis  grues  rapinis 
Hirantur  pumilos  ferociores.” 

Women  fighting  in  the  arena  had  been  seen  under  Nero.  Tac.  Arm.  xv.  32. 

3 Suetonius  ( Domit . 19.)  mentions  some  extraordinary  instances  of  his  ski]] 
with  the  bow,  which  he  would  sometimes  exhibit  to  select  guests  in  his  Alban 
villa. 

3 Dion,  lxvii.  8. ; lxix.  6. : roi/ro  dr/  to  tov  Aofienavov  oiurr^aaTe. 


134 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  81. 


emperor  deigned  to  institute  quinquennial  contests  in  poetry, 
eloquence,  and  music,  after  the  fashion  of  the  graceful  games 
of  Hellas,  long  since  naturalized  in  the  Grecian  cities  of  Cam- 
pania.1 2 But  Domitian  was  an  antiquarian,  and  he  required 
a precedent.  He  discovered  that  on  the  first  rebuilding  of 
the  Capitol  by  Camillas,  the  senate  had  directed  their  pre- 
server to  institute  dramatic  shows,  in  which  the  taking  of 
Veii  held  a prominent  place.1  Fortified  by  this  authority, 
Domitian  celebrated  his  own  restoration  of  the  national  tem- 
ple with  games  on  the  Grecian  model,  such  as  Hero  had  ex- 
hibited with  some  reserve  in  his  private  circus,  in  the  most 
public  manner,  and  on  a scale  of  unusual  magnificence.  On 
the  summit  of  the  Capitoline  hill,  in  the  face  of  men  and  gods, 
the  compositions  of  the  rival  candidates,  both  in  Greek  and 
Latin,  were  cited,  and  the  victors  crowned  with  oak-leaves 
in  gilded  metal.3  The  subjects  of  these  pieces  were  vari- 
ous, but  we  may  believe  that  they  turned  for  the  most 
part  on  the  praise  of  the  emperor  himself,  and  served, 
more  or  less  directly,  for  his  glorification,  as  a warrior,  a 
poet,  a ruler,  or  a demigod.4 *  The  connexion  between  the 
founder  of  the  prize  and  the  god  in  whose  honour  it  was 
founded  was  touched,  no  doubt,  more  or  less  delicately  by 
every  competitor.6  The  favourite  poets  and  orators  of  the 
day  contended  eagerly  for  these  distinctions,  and  lamented, 
when  they  failed  of  success,  the  harshness  or  ingratitude  of 

1 Suet.  Domit.  4.  Sturdy  Romans  still  continued  to  protest  against  these 
Hellenic  corruptions,  and  even,  when  they  could,  to  put  them  down.  When 
Rufinus  abolished  the  Gymnic  Games  at  Vienna,  Junius  Mauricus  exclaimed  in 
the  senate,  “ Vellem  etiam  Rom®  tolli  possent ! ” Plin.  Ep.  iv.  22. 

2 Liv.  v.  50.  (a.  u.  c.  389) ; Festus,  p.  322. 

3 Censorin.  de  Die  Nat.  18.  (a.  u.  c.  839,  a.  d.  86,  Eckhel,  vi.  381.);  Stat. 
Sylv.  iii.  5. : “ sanctoque  indutum  Csesaris  auro.”  Martial,  iv.  1.  6. : “ Perque 
manus  tantas,  plurima  quercus  eat.” 

4 Plin.  Fancy.  54. : “Et  quis  jam  locus  miser®  adulationis  man ebat  ignarus, 
cum  laudes  imperatorum  ludis  etiam  et  comissationibus  celebrarentur,  saltaren- 

tur,  atque  in  omne  ludibrium  effeminatis  vocibus,  modis,  gestibus  franger- 
entur  ? ” 

6 Quintil.  Inst.  Oral.  iii.  T.  4. 


A.  U.  834.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


135 


the  patron  deity.1  The  transformation  of  Italian  Rome  into 
a Grecian  city  by  the  architects  of  Hero  was  crowned  by 
this  truly  Grecian  solemnity,  which  seems  to  have  taken  root 
in  the  habits  and  tastes  of  the  people,  and  exercised,  no  doubt, 
great  influence  upon  them.  The  periodical  contests  of  the 
Agon  Capitolinus  (for  even  the  name  they  bore  was  Greek) 
continued  without  interruption  down  to  the  fifth  century ; 
the  solemn  consecration  to  the  muses  of  a spot  known  for  so 
many  ages  only  as  the  stronghold  of  national  force,  sank 
deep  into  the  minds  of  successive  generations.  The  temple 
and  the  citadel  have  vanished  in  storm  and  fire,  and  even 
their  sites  have  become  the  battlefield  of  antiquaries ; but  it 
was  on  the  Capitoline  hill  that  the  song  of  Petrarch  was 
crowned  in  history,  and  the  song  of  Corinna  in  romance. 

At  the  Capitoline  games  Domitian  presided  in  person,  in 
the  Grecian  costume,  which  it  had  hitherto  been  deemed 
disgraceful  for  a Roman  to  assume  in  Rome, 
wearing  also  on  his  head  a new-fangled  coronet 
of  gold  adorned  with  figures  of  Jupiter,  Juno  and 
Minerva:  the  flamens  of  Jupiter,  who  sate  by  his 
side,  bore  on  their  own  fillets  the  image  of  the 
emperor.  The  first  of  the  Caesars  had  chosen  his  ancestress 
Venus  for  his  patron  divinity;  Augustus  had  placed  himself 
under  the  protection  of  Apollo ; Domitian  affected  to  believe 
that  he  was  the  special  favourite  of  Minerva.2  He  founded 


Assumes  Mi- 
nerva as  Ms 
patroness,  and 
institutes 
games  in  her 
honour  at  his 
Alban  villa. 


1 Stat.  Sylv.  iii.  5.  3T. : 

“ Tu  cum  Capitolia  nostra 
Inficiata  lyroe,  ssevum  ingratumque  dolebas 
Mecum  victa  Jovem.” 

v.  3.  232. : 

“ Et  fugit  speratus  honos,  cum  lustra  parentis 
Invida  Tarpeii  canerem.” 

Posterity  has  avenged  the  defeated  competitor  by  preserving  so  large  a portion 
of  his  verses,  while  it  has  let  even  the  names  of  his  rivals  perish.  Imhof  sup- 
poses,  not  unreasonably,  that  he  was  distanced,  not  in  poetry,  but  in  adulation. 

2 Quintil.  Inst.  Or  at.  x.  1.  91. : familiare  numen  Minervae.”  Suet.  Homit. 
15.  Statius  and  Martial,  passim.  In  token  of  his  devotion  to  this  goddess 
Domitian  is  said  to  have  demanded  to  be  chosen  Archon  of  Athens.  Philostr. 


136 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  81. 


annual  contests  in  her  honour  at  his  Alban  villa,  and  in  these, 
too,  he  combined  poetry  and  rhetoric  with  musical  and  gym- 
nic  exhibitions.  Statius,  who  failed  of  the  prize  on  the  Capi- 
tol, was  thrice  crowned  at  Alba ; but  he  seems  to  have  held 
the  olive  chaplet  of  the  goddess  which  he  gained  in  less  es- 
timation than  the  oaken  wreath  of  Jupiter  which  was  denied 
him.1  Domitian’s  vanity  was  better  employed  when  it  led 
him  to  bestow  his  regards,  however  cold  and  stately,  on  men 
of  letters ; when  he  conferred  on  the  learned  and 
virtuous  Quintilian  the  ornaments  of  the  consul- 
ship, and  made  him  tutor  to  his  youthful  kins- 
men ; when  he  encouraged,  with  his  applause, 
and  at  least  with  some  trifling  recognition  of 
more  substantial  value,  the  genius  of  Statius  and  Martial. 
Men  of  still  higher  character  or  position,  such  as  Tacitus  and 
Pliny,  owed  to  his  discerning  patronage  their  early  advance- 
ment in  public  life ; though  they  and  others  might  pretend 
at  a later  period  to  have  shrunk  from  a protection  which  de- 
manded unworthy  adulation.  True  it  is,  perhaps,  that  no 
business,  however  trifling,  was  transacted  in  the  senate  with- 
out the  preface  of  a fulsome  eulogy  on  the  prince.2  The  em- 
peror’s tame  lion,  or  mutilated  valet,  was  celebrated  with  no 
less  fervid  eloquence  than  a victory  over  the  foes  of  the  re- 
public.3 The  repair  of  twenty  miles  of  pavement  on  the 
well-worn  route  to  Puteoli  was  made  the  subject  of  an  ex- 


His  patronage 
of  men  of  let- 
ters. Quintil- 
ian, Statius, 
Martial,  Taci- 
tus, and  Pliny 
the  younger. 


tended  panegyric,  while  the  Flavian  amphitheatre,  the  im- 
mortal work  of  Y espasian  and  Titus,  to  Avhich  Domitian  had 
only  set  the  coping  stones,  extorted  from  the  courtliest  of 
his  poets  the  tribute  of  but  one  or  two  short  epigrams.4 


Vit.  Apoll.  viii.  16.  He  assumed  her  effigy  on  his  medals  from  the  year  833, 
Eckhel,  vi.  375.  Philostratus  affirms  that  he  pretended  to  be  her  son. 

1 Suet.  Domit.  4. ; Stat.  Sylv.  iii.  2.  28. : “ ter  me  nitidis  Albana  ferentem 
Serta  comis.” 

2 Plin.  Paneg.  34. : “ nihil  tarn  vuigare  tam  parvum  in  Senatu  agebatur,  ut 
non  laudibus  principum  immorarentur  quibuscunque  censendi  necessitas  inch 
disset.” 

s Stat.  Sylv.  ii.  5. : “ Leo  mansuetus  Imperatoris  ; ” iii.  4. : “ Coma  Earini. ' 

* Stat.  Sylv.  iv.  3. : “Via  Domitiana.”  Martial,  De  Speclac.  1.  2. 


A.  U.  834.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


137 

Domitian’s  dubious  successes  in  the  field  furnished  a theme  for 
many  sounding  hyperboles.1  But  the  men  of  letters  reserved, 
as  might  be  expected,  their  most  laboured  encomiums  for  the 
verses  or  speeches  to  which  their  princely  patron  himself 
save  utterance.  To  him.  say  Silius,  the  muses  . , ^ ^ 
shall  themselves  bring  offerings , and  Phoebus  shall  flattery  of  the 
marvel  at  a song  more  potent  than  that  which 
stayed  the  Hebrus , and  uprooted  Rhodope ? 

Such  were  the  inordinate  compliments  which  could 
please  the  ears  of  a son  of  the  homely  Vespasian,  when,  con- 
scious of  the  hatred  of  his  senators,  he  could  no  longer  soothe 
his  apprehensions  by  the  vows  of  loyalty  extorted  from  them. 
The  poor  poets  could  cause  him  no  anxiety.  He  need  not 

1 Martial,  ii.  2.,  v.  19.,  vii.  1-8.  Sil.  Ital.  iii.  608.  Stat.  Sglv.  11,  cc. 
Theb.  i.  19. : 

“ Bisque  jugo  Rhenum,  bis  adactum  legibus  Istrum 
Et  conjurato  dejectos  vertice  Dacos.” 

2 Sil.  Ital.  iii.  618. : 

“ Quin  et  Romuleos  superabit  voce  nepotes 
Quis  erit  eloquio  partum  decus : huic  sua  Musre 
Sacra  ferent ; meliorque  lyra  cui  substitit  Hebrus 
Et  venit  Rhodope,  Phrebo  miranda  loquetur.” 

Comp.  Quintil.  Inst.  Orat.  x.  i.  91. : “Hos  nominavimus  quia  Germanicum 
Augustum  ab  institutis  studiis  deflexit  cura  terrarum,  parumque  Dis  visum  est 
esse  eum  maximum  poetarum,”  &e.  Valerius  Elaecus  specifies  a poem  by 
Domitian  on  the  war  in  Judea  (Argon,  i.  12.):  “Versam  proles  tua  pandat 
Idumen,  Namque  potest,”  and  some  modem  critics  ascribe  to  him,  I think 
erroneously,  the  translation  of  Aratus,  which  goes  under  the  name  of  German- 
icus  Caesar.  Quintilian,  in  the  preface  to  Inst.  Orat.  iv.,  flatters  him  for  his 
accomplishments  as  an  orator,  and  even  Suetonius  admits  them  to  some  extent. 
It  is  difficult  to  say  how  far  Domitian  deserves  to  be  regarded  as  a patron  of 
literature.  The  seventh  satire  of  Juvenal  beginning,  “ Et  spes  et  ratio  studiorum 
in  Csesare  tantum,”  is  probably  of  a later  date.  Suetonius  speaks  in  the  most 
disparaging  terms  of  his  personal  acquirements,  which  are  so  highly  lauded  by 
the  authorities  above  cited.  He  allows,  however,  that  he  bestowed  pains  and 
expense  in  restoring  the  treasures  of  the  great  libraries  destroyed  at  Rome  by 
fire : “ exemplaribus  undique  petitis  missisque  Alexandriam  qui  describerent 
emendarentque.”  Domit.  20.  His  favours  to  Statius  and  Martial  seem  to 
have  been  but  slender.  Tacitus  only  allows  that  he  pretended  to  love  letters 
and  poetry.  Hist.  iv.  in  fin. 


138 


HISTORY  OR  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  81. 


read  their  blessings  backwards,  and  interpret  their  notes  of 
admiration  into  disguised  tokens  of  disgust.  To  them  he 
could  allow  unlimited  licence  to  brand  the  memory  of  Nero, 
to  sound  the  praises  of  Lucan,  who  had  plotted  against  a ty- 
rant, and  of  Thrasea,  whom  a tyrant  had  sacrificed,  neglect- 
ing in  their  favour  the  common  interest  of  tyrants  to  protect 
the  memory  of  one  another.1  Even  in  the  last  moments  of 
his  own  tyranny  he  clung  tenaciously  to  flatteries  such  as 
had  hardly  been  lavished  on  the  opening  promise  of  his  pre- 
decessor. On  the  kalends  of  January  95,  the  fifteenth  year 
of  his  reign,  when  he  entered  on  his  seventeenth  consulship, 
a period  when  all  the  worst  features  of  his  character  had  been 
brought  into  full  relief  by  the  terrors  of  the  Antonian  con- 
spiracy, he  could  allow  the  humble  courtier  Statius  to  paint 
in  glowing  colours  the  greetings  of  the  god  Janus,  the  patron 
of  Roman  chronology.  Hail , great  father  of  the  world , 
about  to  inaugurate  with  me  the  ages!  Behold  the  fresh 
splendour  of  our  temples!  Behold  the  aspiring  flames  of  our 
festal  fires!  on  thee  the  constellations  of  my  winter  rain  a 
genial  warmth!  ....  Augustushore  the  fasces  thirteen  times  ; 
but  it  was  in  his  latter  years  that  he  first  began  to  deserve 
them.  Thou,  still  in  thy  youth , hast  already  transcended  thy 
ancestors.  A thousand  trophies  shalt  thou  gain  ; only  permit 
them  to  be  triumphs  ! Tet  remaineth  Bactria  to  be  conquer- 
ed: yet  remaineth  Babylon.  JSfo  Indian  laurel  has  yet  been 
laid  in  the  lap  of  Jupiter : the  Arabs , the  Seres  kneel  not  yet 
in  supplication.  All  the  year  hath  not  yet  its  full  honours. 

1 Statius,  Sylv.  ii.  7.  100. : 

“ Sic  et  tu  rabidi  nefas  tyranni 
Jussus  prsecipitem  subire  lethem.” 

Martial,  vii.  21. : “Heu!  Nero  crudelis  nullaque  invisior  umbra.” 
i.  9. : “magni  Thrasese  consummatique  Catonis.” 

The  praises  of  Cato  had  been  tolerated  by  Augustus,  but  Pompeius  and  the 
whole  “ Pharsalian  crowd  ” receive  their  apotheosis  from  Statius : 

“ Qua  Pharsalia  turba  congregatur  ; 

Et  te  Dobile  carmen  insonantem 
Pompeii  comitantur  et  Catones.” 


A U.  834.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


139 


Ten  months  still  wait  impatient  to  be  designated  by  thy 
titles .* 

Nero  Lad  Lis  social  Lours,  and  tlie  temper  to  enjoy  tLem. 
His  smile  was  attractive  ; Le  could  flatter  and  cLarm ; Le  Lad 
companions  and  favourites,  possibly  friends  and  ^ 
lovers.  But  the  genius  of  Domitian  was  always  moodiness  and 
solitary  and  morose ; he  seems  to  Lave  Lad  no  per- 
sonal intimacies ; Lis  humour,  when  Le  chose  to  unbend,  was 
caustic  and  saturnine.  Shrewd  enough  to  take  an  accurate 
measure  of  the  sycophants  around  him,  Le  enjoyed  a grim  sat- 
isfaction in  playing  on  their  fears.  If  you  only  talked  with 
him  on  the  state  of  the  weather,  your  life  was  at  stake,  says  the 
satirist,  and  you  felt  that  it  was  at  stake.1 2  In  the  depth  of  his 
disimulation  he  was  an  imitator  of  Tiberius  whom  he  profess- 
ed to  make  his  model  both  in  his  measures  and  his  demeanour ; 
but  the  amusement  he  derived  from  dissembling  with  his  vic- 
tims was  all  his  own.  Of  the  feats  he  performed  in  disguising 
his  cruel  intentions  from  the  wretches  he  was  about  to  sacri- 
fice, some  ghastly  stories  were  circulated,  which  suffice  at 
least  to  show  the  estimate  commonly  formed  of  him.3 

The  incident  about  to  be  related  is  not  to  be  regarded  as 
a myth  invented  in  later  times  to  realize  the  popular  idea  of 
Domitian’s  moody  humour.  Though  narrated  by  T]l0  colincil  of 
a professed  satirist,  we  are  expressly  told  to  con-  descriSby” 
skier  it  as  a veritable  history,  and  we  are  bound,  Juvenal- 
I think,  to  accept  it  as  at  least  true  in  the  main.  If  indeed 
we  admit  the  accuracy  of  every  particular,  it  presents  inter- 
nal evidence  of  having  occurred  not  later  than  the  early  win- 
ter of  the  year  84,  the  fourth  of  the  tyrant’s  reign ; and  as  it 

1 Statius,  Sylv.  iv.  1.  These  warlike  aspirations  are  very  like  those  at  the 
beginning  of  Lucan’s  poem  ; but  there  they  are  addressed  to  Rome  and  the 
citizens,  here  to  the  emperor  alone. 

2 Juvenal,  iv.  ST. : 

“ Cum  quo  de  pluviis  aut  sestibus  aut  nimboso 
Yere  locuturi  fatum  pendebat  amici.” 

8 Suet.  Domit.  11.;  Plin.  Paneg.  66.:  “quod  tarn  infidum  mare  quam 
olanditise  principum  illorum  ? ” etc. 


140 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.81. 


shows  the  insolence  of  Domitian  rather  than  his  barbarity, 
the  meek  subservience  of  his  attendants  rather  than  their  ab- 
ject terror,  it  may  appear  to  represent  one  of  the  earlier 
scenes  of  his  career.1  About  the  end,  then,  of  the  year  84, 
the  members  of  the  imperial  council,  the  select  associates 
and  advisers, — not  the  favourites,  we  are  reminded,  of  the 
prince,  but  rather  the  especial  objects  of  his  hate,  and  pale  as 
all  might  see,  from  the  anxiety  ever  present  to  those  who 
were  most  in  contact  with  him, — were  suddenly  required  to 
repair  in  haste  to  their  master.2  They  were,  it  seems,  eleven 
in  number,  and  in  twice  or  thrice  as  many  verses  their  crimes 
or  virtues  are  succinctly  traced  for  us  with  a pen  of  cynical 
sincerity.  One  after  another  pass  before  us,  Pegasus  the  pre- 
fect— say  rather,  the  bailiff— of  the  city ; for  what  is  Romo 
but  the  emperor’s  farm,  and  the  prefect  of  Rome,  but  his 
manciple  ? 3 Fuscus,  brave  and  voluptuous,  soon  to  leave  his 
limbs  a prey  to  the  Dacian  vultures ; 4 Crispus,  a mild  and 
genial  grey-beard,  who  has  long  owed  his  life  to  the  meek- 
ness with  which  he  has  yielded  to  the  current,  and  shrunk 
from  the  vain  assertion  of  independence ; 6 the  Glabrios,  father 

1 Juvenal,  iv.  35.:  “Res  vera  agitur.”  Assuming,  as  Isay,  the  accuracy 
of  details,  the  date  may  be  fixed  by  the  introduction  of  Fuscus  into  the  scene, 
who  was  killed  in  Dacia  in  the  campaign  of  85,  or  at  least  quitted  Rome  for 
the  frontiers  in  the  spring  of  that  year.  But  the  incident  took  place,  “jam 
cedente  pruinis  Auctumno,”  i.  e.,  at  the  beginning  of  winter ; not  later,  there- 
fore, than  November  84.  It  might  be  argued,  perhaps,  from  the  allusion  to 
Britain  as  not  yet  pacified,  that  it  was  before  the  conclusion  of  Agricola’s  war- 
fare, and  accordingly  a year,  or  even  two  years,  earlier. 

2 Juvenal,  iv.  '72. : “ quos  oderat  ille.”  Comp.  Tacitus  {Hist.  iv.  8.)  of  a 
confidant  of  Nero,  who  confesses : “ non  minus  sibi  anxiam  talem  amicitiam 
quam  aliis  exilium.” 

3 From  the  scholiast  on  Juv.  iv.  '76.,  and  from  some  notices  in  the  Corpus 
Jur.  Civil.,  we  learn  that  Pegasus,  the  freedman  of  Domitian  or  Yespasian, 
obtained  the  consulship,  and  gave  his  name  to  certain  edicts  of  the  senate.  He 
seems,  even  by  the  satirist’s  admission,  to  have  been  a respectable  man. 

4 Juv.  iv.  112. : 

“ Et  qui  vulturibus  servabat  viscera  Dacis 
Fuscus,  marmorea  meditatus  prmlia  villa.” 

• Juv.  iv.  81.  Quintilian  has  some  favourable  allusions  to  this  man’s  wit 
and  temper. 


A.  U.  834.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


141 


and  son,  of  whom  the  elder  slunk  through  an  inglorious  exist- 
ence in  pusillanimous  security,  the  younger  was  doomed  to 
perish  innocently  condemned  to  fight  with  beasts  in  the  are- 
na ; 1 2 the  blind  Catullus,  deadliest  of  delators,  with  whom 
Domitian,  as  with  a blind  and  aimless  weapon,  aimed  at  his 
destined  victims  ;3  to  these  were  added  the  sly  Yeiento,  the 
fat  old  sycophant,  Montanus,  Crispinus  redolent  with  the 
perfumes  of  his  native  East,  the  vile  spy  Pompeius  who  slit 
men’s  throats  with  a whisper,  and  Rubrius  the  perpetrator  of 
some  crime  too  bad,  it  seems,  to  be  specified  even  in  that  day 
of  evil  deeds  and  shameless  scandals. 

Such  were  the  men  who  now  hurried  in  the  darkness 
along  the  Appian  way,  and  met  at  midnight  in  the  vestibule 
of  the  imperial  villa,  or  the  tyrant’s  fortress,  which  crowned 
the  long  slope  of  the  ascent  to  Alba.3  Anxiously  they  asked 
each  other,  What  news  ? What  the  purport  of  tlieir  unex- 
pected summons?  What  foes  of  Home  had  broken  the 
prince’s  slumbers — the  Chatti  or  the  Sicambri,  the  Britons 
or  the  Dacians  ? "While  they  were  yet  waiting  for  admission, 
the  menials  of  the  palace  entered,  bearing  aloft  a huge  turbot, 
a present  to  the  emperor,  which  they  had  the  mortification 
of  seeing  introduced  into  his  presence,  while  the  doors  were 
still  shut  against  themselves.  A humble  fisherman  of  the 
Upper  coast  had  found  the  monster  stranded  on  the  beach, 


1 Juvenal,  iv.  94.  foil.  The  younger  Acilius  Glabrio  has  been  mentioned 
before.  Juvenal  insinuates  that  his  descent  into  the  arena  was  a feint  to  make 
himself  despicable,  and  so  protect  himself  from  the  emperor’s  jealousy,  and  is 
compared  to  the  simulated  folly  of  Brutus. 

2 Of  Messalinus  Catullus  see  Plin.  Ep.  iv.  22. : “ qui  luminibus  orbatus 
ingenio  saevo  mala  csecitatis  addiderat ; non  verebatur,  non  erubescebat,  non 
miserebatur ; qui  saspius  Domitiano,  non  secus  ac  tela,  quae  et  ipsa  caeca  et 
improvida  feruntur,  optimum  quemque  contorquebatur.” 

3 Juvenal,  iv.  145. : “ quos  Albanam  dux  magnus  in  arcem  Traxerat.”  The 
6ite  of  this  villa,  which  belonged  originally  to  Pompeius,  and  became  a favour- 
ite residence  of  the  emperors,  may  still  be  traced  on  the  slope  of  the  hill 
covered  by  the  modem  Albano,  about  fourteen  miles  from  Rome.  A detach- 
ment of  prastorians  was  quartered  in  the  vicinity,  whence  the  term  arx  applied 
to  the  palace  itself. 


142 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  81. 


beneatli  the  fane  of  Venus  at  Ancona,  and  had  hurried  with 
his  prize  across  the  Apennines,  to  receive  a reward  for  so 
rare  an  offering  to  the  imperial  table.  When  at  last  the 
councillors  were  admitted,  the  question  reserved  for  their 
deliberations  was  no  other  than  this,  whether  the  big  fish 
should  be  cut  in  pieces,  or  served  up  whole  on  some  enormous 
platter,  constructed  in  its  honour.  The  cabinet  was  no  doubt 
sensibly  persuaded  that  the  question  allowed  at  least  of  no 
delay,  and  with  due  expressions  of  surprise  and  admiration 
voted  the  dish,  and  set  the  potter’s  wheel  in  motion..  Such 
is  the  outline  of  a story  which  Juvenal  has  embellished 
with  his  happiest  sallies,  abounding  with  illustrations  of 
character  and  manners.  Could  we  believe  in  its  literal  truth, 
we  might  regard  it  perhaps  as  the  most  curious  domestic 
anecdote  of  antiquity ; but  if  it  be  no  more  than  a sport  of 
wit,  and  a bold  satirical  invention,  it  still  has  its  value  as  a 
lively  representation  of  the  genius  of  the  times.1 * 

There  was  a time  when  Domitian  might  be  satisfied  with 


indulging  his  cynical  contempt  for  his  creatures  by  merely 
The  funereal  vexing  and  humiliating  them.  As  he  advanced 
ecribedby6"  111  his  career  of  tyranny  he  required  the  more 
Dlon-  pungent  gratification  of  overwhelming  them  with 

terror.  Such  an  anecdote  is  preserved  by  Dion,  and  the 
narrative  of  the  historian  forms  a fitting  pendant  to  that  of 
the  satirist.  Having  once  made  a great  feast  for  the  citizens , 
he  proposed,  we  read,  to  follow  it  up  with  an  entertainment 
to  a select  number  of  the  highest  nobility.  He  fitted  up  an 
apartment  all  in  blade.  The  ceiling  was  blade , the  walls 
were  blade , the  pavement  was  blade , and  upon  it  were  ranged 
rows  of  bare  stone  seats , blade  also.  The  guests  were  intro- 

duced at  night  without  their  attendants , and  each  might  see 
at  the  head  of  his  couch  a column  placed , like  a tombstone , 
on  which  his  own  name  was  graven , with  the  cresset  lamp 


1 The  reader  will  remember  the  “ Minerva’s  shield  ” of  Vitellius,  and  sus- 
pect perhaps  that  this  story,  notwithstanding  the  mock  gravity  of  the  author’s 

disclaimer,  is  fancifully  combined  from  the  tradition  of  the  one  emperor’s 

gluttony,  and  the  grim  humour  of  the  other. 


A.U.  834.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


143 


above  it , such  as  is  suspended  in  the  tombs.  Presently  there 
entered  a troop  of  nalced  boys , blackened,  who  danced  around 
with  horrid  movements , and  then  stood  still  before  them , 
offering  them  the  fragments  of  food  ivhich  are  commonly 
presented  to  the  dead.  The  guests  were  paralyzed  with  terror , 
expecting  at  every  moment  to  be  put  to  death  / and  the  more, 
as  the  others  maintained  a deep  silence,  as  though  they  were 
dead  themselves,  and  JDomitian  spake  of  things  pertaining  to 
the  state  of  the  departed  only.  But  this  funereal  feast  was  not 
destined  to  end  tragically.  Caesar;  happened  to  he  in  a sport- 
ive mood,  and  when  he  had  sufficiently  enjoyed  his  jest,  and 
had  sent  his  visitors  home  expecting  worse  to  follow,  he  bade 
each  he  presented  with  the  silver  cup  and  platter  on  which 
his  dismal  supper  had  been  served,  and  with  the  slave,  now 
neatly  washed  and  apparelled,  who  had  waited  upon  him. 
Such,  said  the  populace,  was  the  way  in  which  it  pleased  the 
emperor  to  solemnize  the  funereal  banquet  of  the  victims  of 
his  defeats  in  Dacia,  and  of  his  persecutions  in  the  city.1 

Such  graceless  buffoonery  in  a public  man  offended  Roman 
dignity  to  a degree  we  can  scarcely  estimate.  It  was  no 
empty  truism,  no  vapid  moralizing  on  the  part  of  indignation  of 
the  poet,  when  he  broke  off  abruptly  in  the  midst  fmperor’s* 
of  his  comic  relation,  to  exclaim  with  passionate  niockerr- 
indignation : Better  all  these  follies, — better  that  he  had  spent 
in  this  despicable  child's  play  all  the  hours  he  gave  to  the 
slaughter  of  Pome’s  noblest  offspring,  unpunished  and  um 
requited.  And  so  he  seems  to  clench  his  fist  and  grind  his 
teeth  at  the  bald-pate  Nero , and  hails  his  destined  fall,  when 
at  last  he  shall  have  made  himself  a terror,  not  to  his  nobles 
only,  but  to  the  slaves  of  his  own  household.  But  at  this 
period  the  best  blood  of  Rome  had  trickled  under  his  hand 
in  a few  intermittent  drops  only,  like  the  first  of  a thunder 
shower.  It  was  not  till  after  the  Antonian  conspiracy  that 
the  stream  began  to  flow  in  a copious  and  unceasing  torrent, 

1 Dion,  lxvii.  9.  From  this  allusion,  and  from  the  mention  of  the  feast 
given  to  the  citizens,  we  may  fix  this  incident  to  the  period  of  Domitian’s  Dacian 
triumph,  a.  d.  91. 


144 


HIST0R5T  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  93. 


and  the  signal  for  the  outburst  was,  perhaps,  the  death  of  the 
bravest  of  the  Romans,  the  man  of  whom  Domitian  stood 
most  in  awe,  whose  removal  might  seem  the  most  necessary 
for  the  secure  exercise  of  his  cruelty.1 

Since  his  recall  from  Britain,  the  conqueror  of  Galgacus 
had  been  content  with  the  modest  dignity  of  a private  sta- 
Deatk  of  Agri-  tion,  in  which  he  enjoyed  the  respect  of  all  good 
C0*  a.  d.  93.  men,  and  might  feel  that  of  all  the  chiefs  of  the 
an  (^rumour  of  armies  there  was  none  to  whom,  had  the  prince’s 
poison.  jealousy  allowed  it,  the  contest  with  the  Dacians 

and  Sarmatians  might  so  confidently  be  entrusted.  But  Do- 
mitian had  plainly  intimated  that  he  dared  not  again  employ 
him,  and  Agricola  had  discreetly  refrained  from  soliciting 
employment.  If  he  was  named  for  an  important  government, 
it  was  with  the  understanding  that  he  should  himself  decline 
it ; but  the  emperor  took  what  was  deemed  a base  advantage 
of  his  moderation,  in  withholding  the  salary  of  the  office, 
which,  it  seems,  ought  in  fairness  to  have  been  pressed  upon 
him.  Domitian  knew  that  he  had  now  openly  mortified  a 
gallant  and  popular  officer,  and  he  began  to  hate  the  man  he 
had  injured.  Such,  as  Tacitus  reminds  us,  is  a common  in- 
firmity of  our  nature ; but  Doraitian’s  temper,  he  adds,  was 
prone  to  take  offence,  and  the  more  he  dissembled  the  more 
was  he  implacable.  Yet  even  his  morose  and  sullen  humour 
was  soothed  by  the  prudence  and  reserve  of  Agricola,  who 
abstained  from  provoking  his  own  fate  by  a vain  pretence  of 
free-mouthed  patriotism.  Thus  he  continued  to  live  in  the 
eyes  of  prince  and  people  down  to  the  year  93,  the  ninth 
from  his  return  to  Rome;  but  on  his  death,  which  occurred 
at  that  critical  period,  the  rumour  spread  that  he  had  been 
cut  off  by  poison.  For  myself, ’ adds  his  biographer,  I know 
nothing,  and  can  affirm  nothing.  This , however , I can  say, 
that  throughout  his  last  illness  the  emperor’’ s own  freedmen, 
the  emperor’s  own  physicians,  were  constant  in  their  visits  and 
inquiries , more  constant  than  courtly  etiquette  might  warrant , 


1 Tac.  Agric.  43. 


A.  U.  846.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


145 


whether  it  were  from  anxiety  or  from  curiosity  only.  The 
day  he  died  his  last  moments  were  watched , and  every  symp- 
tom reported  by  set  couriers , and  none  could  believe  that  the 
emperor  would  take  such  pains  to  get  the  first  intimation  of 
an  event  he  really  deprecated.  Nevertheless , he  assumed  all 
the  outward  signs  of  grief  \ though  reckless  by  this  time  of 
popular  hatred ; for  it  was  easier  to  Dornitian  to  dissemble 
his  joy  over  a dead  enemy  than  his  fear  of  a living  one. 
Thus  much , at  least , was  ascertained , that  on  reading  Agri- 
colds  will , in  which  he  found  himself  appointed  coheir  with 
the  wife  and  daughter , he  openly  avowed  his  satisfaction  at 
the  honour  done  him , and  at  the  esteem , as  he  supposed. , thus 
manifested  towards  him.  So  blind  was  he,  so  corrupted  by 
constant  flattery , as  not  to  know  that  a virtuous  prince  is 
never  chosen  for  his  heir  by  a virtuous  parent.1 

We  have  been  too  much  accustomed  to  the  unproved  in- 
sinuations of  foul  play  advanced  by  Tacitus  against  the 
enemies  of  his  order  to  expect  from  him  any  cor- 

. ,,  , . Considerations 

roboration  tor  charges  thus  brandished  m the  ontheimputa- 

r-  c*  i „ tion  of  poison- 

tace  ot  the  tormentor  ot  the  senate.  W e can  ing  to  Domi- 
only  regard  them  as  a manifesto  of  defiance,  de- 
livered indeed  long  after  the  tyrant’s  fall,  and  addressed  to 
an  audience  that  welcomed  every  censure,  and  applauded 
every  surmise  against  him.  Yet,  there  is  a fair  presumption 
against  a despot  to  whom  such  crimes  could  be  popularly 
imputed.  Dornitian  was  surely  not  incapable  of  poisoning 
Agricola.  The  death  of  the  old  commander,  it  may  be  added, 
was  singularly  opportune  to  the  emperor.  The  biographer, 
indeed,  has  told  us  in  memorable  language,  that  the  sufferer 
himself  was  fortunate  not  only  in  the  brilliancy  of  his  life, 
but  in  the  seasonableness  of  his  decease.  Agricola , he  ex 
claims,  in  the  long  organ  peals  of  his  sounding  peroration, 
Agricola  saw  not  the  curia  besieged , and  the  senate  surround- 
ed by  armed  men,  and  the  slaughter  of  so  many  consulars,  the 

1 Tac.  Agric.  48.  Agricola  died  August  23,  a.  d.  93  (a.  tr.  846),  at  the  age 
of  fifty-six.  Agric.  p.  44.  Dion  accepts  the  rumour  propagated  by  Tacitus, 
and  ascribes  his  death  without  hesitation  to  poison. 

122 


140 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  93 


flight  or  exile  of  so  many  noble  women , from  one  fatal  pro 
scription.  Hitherto,  he  assures  us,  the  delators,  such  as 
Carus  and  Catullus,  exercised  their  hideous  trade  in  the 
secret  chambers  of  the  palace.  Not  till  after  Agricola’s 
death  did  they  venture  to  denounce  the  good,  the  noble,  the 
wise,  in  public,  and  incited  senators  to  lay  hands  on  senators, 
praetorians  on  consulars.1  It  was  opportune  for  Domitian 
that  at  the  opening  of  this  sanguinary  career,  at  the  moment 
when  his  terrors  had  been  frenzied  by  the  outbreak  of  the 
Antonian  conspiracy,  and  his  only  safety  seemed  to  lie  in  the 
swift  extermination  of  the  highest  and  the  noblest,  the  man 
whom  of  all  others  he  might  have  thought  most  formidable, 
should  be  suddenly  and  unexpectedly  removed.  Had  Agri- 
cola lived,  would  Domitian  have  dared  to  inaugurate  his 
reign  of  terror  ? Had  Domitian  given  the  rein  to  his  sav- 
age cruelty,  would  not  the  Senate  have  called  on  Agricola  to 
deliver  it  ? 

Such  considerations  may  still  make  us  hesitate  to  absolve 
Domitian  from  the  crime  of  assassination.  On  the  other 
hand,  we  must  observe  that  the  language,  both 

Proscription  of  . . . . 

the  best  and  of  JLacitus  and  Pliny,  points  to  this  epoch  as  the 

noblest  of  the  . „ J -A 

senators.  commencement  ot  a new  era  ol  blood,  and  leaves 
us  under  the  impression  that  hitherto  the  despot’s 
tyranny  had  been  exhibited  in  only  occasional  excesses.  It 
was  in  the  year  93  that  Pliny  filled  the  office  of  praetor ; but 
he  did  not  succeed  to  the  consulship  till  a later  period,  and 
under  a new  and  more  auspicious  reign.  Hitherto,  as  he  tells 
us,  he  had  consented  to  be  advanced  in  his  public  career  by 
the  archdissembler,  whose  wickedness  he  had  not  fully  fa- 
Jhomed;  but  now,  when  Domitian  threw  off  the  mask,  and 
openly  professed  a hatred  of  all  good  men , the  virtuous  aspi- 
rant at  once  stopped  short.2 * * 5  But  the  death  of  Agricola  was, 


1 Tac.  Agric.  45. : “ mox  nostrse  duxere  Helvidium  in  carcerem  manus ; ” 

Comp.  Plin.  Ep.  ix.  13. : “inter  multa  scelera  multorum  nullum  atrocius  vide- 

batur  quam  quod  in  senatu  senator  senatori,  praetorius  consular!,  reo  judex 

manus  intulisset.” 

5 Plin.  Paneg.  95. : “ cursu  quondam  provectus  ab  illo  insidiosissimo  prin 


A.  U.  846.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


147 


as  it  'were,  the  signal  for  the  proscription  of  the  most  eminent 
senators,  precisely  those  most  closely  connected  in  blood  and 
feeling  with  Thrasea,  the  victim  of  Nero,  and  Helvidins,  the 
victim  of  Vespasian.  Upon  them  and  others  the  fury  of  the 
delators  was  let  loose,  and  charges,  on  grounds  for  the  most 
part  absurdly  frivolous,  were  advanced  in  the  senate.  Aru- 
lenus  Rusticus  and  Senecio  were  thus  hunted  to  death  for 
writing  in  praise  of  these  noble  Stoics ; a son  of  Helvidius  for 
appearing  to  reflect  on  Domitian’s  conjugal  infidelities ; Ma- 
ternus  for  the  crime  of  declaiming  against  tyrants ; Cocceia- 
nus  suffered  for  having  kept  the  birthday  of  his  kinsman,  the 
emperor  Otho ; Pomponianus  on  the  still  more  trifling  pretext 
that  he  set  up  in  his  house  a in  ap  of  the  world,  and  compiled 
a volume  of  royal  speeches  from  the  history  of  Livy ; Lucul- 
lus,  formerly  prefect  in  Britain,  perished  for  giving  to  a 
newly-invented  javelin  the  name  of  Lucullean.  And  lastly, 
to  close  the  gloomy  list,  which  might  be  still  further  extend- 
ed even  from  our  imperfect  records,  Flavius  Sabinus,  the  em- 
peror’s cousin,  suffered  ostensibly  on  no  graver  charge  than 
the  mistake  of  a herald  in  styling  him  imperator  instead  of 
consul.  Meanwhile  Juventius  Celsus,  who  had  actually  con- 
spired against  Domitian,  was  allowed  to  live,  on  his  under- 
taking to  make  important  disclosures,  which  he  postponed 
on  various  pretexts  till  the  emperor’s  death  relieved  him  from 
his  pledge.1 

The  death  of  Agricola  was  also  followed  by  the  second 
and  more  stringent  edict  against  the  philosophers,  a persecu- 
tion which  we  cannot  fail  to  connect  with  the  second  edict 
judicial  murder  of  the  Stoics  in  the  senate,  the  ^“lo^ers, 
connexions  of  Thrasea  and  Helvidius.  Domitian  A- D- 9i 

cipe,  antequam  profiteretur  odium  bonorum  ; postquam  professus  est  substitL” 
But,  in  Ep.  iii.  11.,  he  says  that  he  was  praetor  in  the  year  in  which  the  philoso- 
phers were  banished  (the  second  time,  a.  d.  93  extr.),  and  Helvidius  and  others 
put  to  death.  Up  to  this  year  then  Pliny  at  least  would  have  us  believe  that 
Domitian’s  conduct  had  not  been  flagrantly  tyrannical. 

1 Suet.  Domit.  10. ; Dion,  Ixvii.  13.  Sabinus,  it  will  be  remembered,  was 
the  husband  of  Julia,  and  Domitian  had  long  regarded  him  with  jealousy,  as 
affecting  imperial  airs:  “indigne  ferens  albatos  et  ipsum  ministros  habere, 
proclamavit,  owe  ayadov  wo2.VK.oipa.viri."  Suet.  c.  12. 


148 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  94 


had  grounds,  no  doubt,  to  apprehend  an  understanding  be- 
tween the  indignant  statesmen  of  the  curia  and  the  professors 
of  wisdom  and  virtue  in  the  schools.  Both  held  the  same 
language  and  used  the  same  watchwords ; both  appealed  to 
the  same  principles  and  the  same  living  examples ; whether 
the  Stoic  declaimed  his  high  political  doctrines  from  the 
benches  of  the  assembly,  or  whether  he  fled  from  public 
business  and  murmured  his  discontent  in  the  shades  of  do- 
mestic privacy,  he  was  equally  an  object  of  suspicion  to  the 
tyrant,  who  feared  open  hostility  in  the  one  case,  and  covert 
intrigue  in  the  other.  While,  however,  the  politicians  were 
put  cruelly  to  death,  the  rhetoricians  seem  to  have  been 
treated  with  some  mildness.  If  we  may  believe  indeed  their 
own  complaints,  they  were  driven  to  the  wildest  recesses  of 
the  empire,  to  the  shores  of  Gaul,  the  sands  of  Libya,  and 
the  steppes  of  Scythia.  But  Artemidorus,  son-in-law  of 
Musonius,  was  removed,  as  Pliny  himself  informs  us,  no 
further  than  to  a suburban  villa,  while  many  teachers  of 
philosophy,  on  throwing  off  their  gowns,  were  suffered  to  abide 
unmolested  in  the  city.  Demetrius  was  able  to  conceal  him- 
self within  the  limits  of  Italy ; nor  is  it  clear  .that  Dion  Chry- 
sostomus  was  actually  relegated  to  the  Ister,  to  which  he 
wandered  in  his  restless  migrations.1  Epictetus  set  up  his 
professorial  chair  at  Nicopolis  in  Epirus.  Apollonius  of 
Tyana,  who  had  been  convicted  of  treasonable  machinations 
early  in  Domitian’s  reign,  had  been  allowed  to  settle  in  the 
eastern  provinces,  and  was  still  haranguing,  agitating,  and 
possibly  conspiring  in  the  pleasant  retreat  of  Ephesus. 

Another,  and  yet  another  year  of  terrors  and  persecutions 
followed,  till  the  jealousies  of  Domitian  were  crowned  by 
the  measures  already  noticed  against  the  Jews 
aixfiast  ’ cr  Christians.  The  murder  of  Flavius  Clemens 
mitian,  ° ° was  the  last,  and  perhaps  the  worst,  of  the  atro- 

cities of  this  reign.  But  committed  as  he  now 
was  to  a struggle  for  life  against  all  that  was  virtuous  and 


Philostr.  Vtt.  A poll.  vii.  4.  10. ; Vit.  Sophist,  i.  7. 


A.  U.  847.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


149 


honest  among  men,  Domitian  seems  to  have  felt  at  last  that 
the  time  for  intrigue  or  dissimulation  in  crime  was  past,  and 
his  increasing  barbarity  did  not  scruple  to  evince  its  pleasure 
in  the  actual  sight  of  the  suffering  it  inflicted.  Even  Nero, 
it  was  said,  had  shrunk  from  witnessing  the  torments  of  his 
victims,  but  Domitian  came  in  person  into  the  senate-house 
to  watch  the  agonies  of  the  accused  and  the  suspected ; he 
personally  interrogated  them  when  arrested,  holding  their 
chains  in  his  hands  for  his  own  security,  while  the  natural 
redness  of  his  countenance  might  equally  disguise  the  glow 
of  shame,  or  the  coolness  of  utter  shamelessness.1  If,  indeed, 
his  victims’  pains  could  be  compensated  by  those  of  their 
persecutor,  they  had  ample  revenge  in  the  fears  that  haunted 
and  maddened  him.  The  dissimulation  he  had  practised 
towards  them  was  a tribute  to  the  terrors  they  continued  to 
inflict  on  him.  Like  his  master  in  statecraft,  he  affected  to 
cast  on  the  senate  the  odium  of  his  most  hateful  sentences, 
and  sometimes  even  courted  popularity  by  pretending  to  re- 
lax the  penalties  his  over-zealous  counsellors  had  recom- 
mended.2 But  the  very  adulation  of  the  senators  became  to 
him  a source  of  solicitude  from  the  general  disgust  it  inspired. 
Accordingly,  he  declined  with  nervous  eagerness  the  honours 
they  continued  to  press  on  him,  and  he  fretfully  disclaimed 
the  invidious  pomp  of  a guard  of  knights.  Old  traditions  of 
self-respect  might  still  linger  even  in  the  second  order  of 
citizens,  and  disgust  them  with  an  act  of  bodily  service.  The 
imperator  led  the  Romans  in  the  field,  but  the  prince  was 

1 Tac.  Agric.  45. : “Nero  tamen  subtraxit  oculos,  jussitque  scelera  non 
spectavit.”  It  was  only  the  injury  to  Roman  nobles  that,  in  the  view  of  Taci- 
tus, deserved  the  name  of  “ scelera,”  atrocities.  He  does  not  represent  Nero 
as  withdrawing  from  the  sight  of  more  vulgar  sufferings.  Comp,  the  expression 
which  follows  : “ s®vus  ille  vultus  et  rubor  quo  se  contra  pudorem  muniebat,” 
with  Suet.  Domit.  18. : “commendari  se  verecundia  oris  sentiebat.”  The  red- 
ness was  natural,  not  factitious.  For  the  other  circumstances  mentioned  in  the 
text  see  Dion,  Ixvii.  12. 

2 Suet.  Domit.  11.  On  such  occasions  he  would  say:  “intelligent  me 
omnes  senatui  interfuisse.” 


150 


HISTORY  OF  THE  KOMARS 


[A.  D.  95. 


still  only  first  among  tils  peers  in  the  city.1 *  Yet  neither 
among  the  senators  nor  the  knights  was  there  spirit  enough 
to  refrain  from  the  most  loathsome  excesses  of  servility ; still 
less  did  either  order  now  raise  a hand  against  the  tyrant  who 
reigned  over  them.  They  beheld  without  resistance  the 
most  honoured  of  their  fellow-citizens  sacrificed  for  the  crime 
of  praising  the  illustrious  dead ; they  beheld  then*  writings 
consumed  in  the  forum,  and  the  voice  of  the  Roman  people, 
the  liberty  of  the  Roman  senate,  stifled,  as  it  were,  on  the 
funeral  pyre ; they  showed,  as  Tacitus,  himself  not  the  least 
patient  among  them,  says,  a remarkable  example  of  patience, 
and  carried  subservience  to  its  utmost  limits,  as  their  ances- 
tors had  carried  independence.3  Instead  of  concerting  the 
honourable  antagonism  of  a Galba  or  a Vespasian  in  the 
camps,  they  left  it  to  the  freedmen  of  the  imperial  household 
to  organize  assassination  in  the  palace.  Domitian,  red  with 
the  blood  of  the  Lamise,  reeking  from  the  slaughter  of  the 
noblest  of  the  citizens,  fell  at  last  by  the  blow  of  a miscreant’s 
dagger,  when  he  had  made  himself  formidable  to  his  own 
menials.3 

In  the  fifteenth  year  of  his  protracted  principate,  Domitian 
had  arrested  the  prefects  of  the  palace  and  of  the  guard,  and 

1 Suet.  Domit.  14.  When  Honorius  entered  Rome,  at  the  close  of  the  fourth 
century,  his  moderation  was  remarked  in  not  suffering  the  senators  to  walk 
before  him.  The  emperor  had  gained  a victory,  and  the  senate  were  willing 
perhaps  to  treat  his  appearance  among  them  as  a triumph,  in  which  case  such 
deference  would  not  have  been  irregular.  But  he  recalled  them  to  a juster  sense 
of  the  circumstances,  and  of  the  real  traditions  of  the  state.  Claudian  some- 
what enhances  his  merit  by  still  treating  his  entry  as  triumphal;  vi.  Com . 
Honor.  549. 

“ moderataque  laudant 

Tempora,  quod  clemens  aditu,  quod  pectore,  solus 
Romanos  vetuit  currum  pracedere  Patres.” 

3 Tac.  Agric.  2. 

3 Juvenal,  iv.  ult.  The  allusion  to  the  Lamia?  refers  to  the  death  of  iElius 
Lamia,  who  indeed  may  have  perished  earlier,  as  the  complaint  against  him 
was  a sarcasm  he  uttered  on  Domitian’s  taking  his  wife  from  him,  which 
occurred  early  in  the  reign  of  Yespasian.  Suet.  Domit.  10. 


A.  IT.  848.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


151 


Prodigies  and 
omens. 


could  no  longer  rely  on  those  most  closely  at-  Danger  and 
tached  to  his  personal  service.  He  could  now  Snf  I)0' 
hold  power  only  by  redoubled  terror,  and  by  the  A D 96 
suddenness  of  his  blows.  It  was  to  overwhelm  A- u-  849- 
and  paralyse  the  intriguer  in  his  own  household  that  he  now 
required  the  head  ofEpaphroditus,  the  freedman  who  had  assist- 
ed Nero  in  his  suicide.1  This  man  had  been  banished  years 
before  for  the  crime  of  killing  Caesar,  even  at  Caesar’s  own  re- 
quest. Domitian  would  cut  off  all  hope  of  life  even  in  exile 
from  the  wretch  who  should  lay  hands  on  the  sacred  person. 
But  the  sacrifice  was  unavailing.  He  could  now 
free  himself  neither  from  men  nor  from  the  gods ; 
neither  from  the  sword  nor  the  elements.  Day  and  night  he 
was  shaken  by  strange  fears.  Evil  omens  and  prodigies  mul- 
tiplied. The  Chaldeans  were  impotent  to  console  him.  The 
gods  by  visions  and  miracles  had  inaugurated  the  Flavian 
dynasty : the  gods,  as  the  worst  and  weakest  of  the  race 
might  well  believe,  were  now  manifestly  departing  from  the 
Flavian  house.  It  was  said,  and  it  may  have  been  said  truly, 
that  during  the  last  eight  months  of  Domitian’s  reign  there 
was  unusual  stir  in  the  atmosphere.  Never  since  the  days 
preceding  the  first  Carsar’s  fall  had  thunderstorms  been  so 
frequent  or  appalling.  The  Capitol  was  struck  from  heaven. 
The  Flavian  temple  had  been  scarred  by  lightning ; the  bolts 
which  fastened  the  emperor’s  golden  statue  on  the  arch  of 
triumph  were  torn  from  their  sockets.  Of  the  three  great 
deities,  the  august  assessors  in  the  Capitol,  Minerva  was  re- 
garded by  Domitian  as  his  special  patroness.  Her  image 
stood  by  his  bedside : his  customary  oath  was  by  her  divini- 
ty. But  now  a dream  apprised  him  that  the  guardian  of  his 
person  was  disarmed  by  the  guardian  of  the  empire,  and  that 
Jupiter  had  forbidden  his  daughter  to  protect  her  favourite 
any  longer.  Scared  by  these  accumulated  horrors  he  lost  all 
self-control,  and  petulantly  cried,  and  the  cry  was  itself  a 


1 Suet.  Domit.  14. ; Dion,  Lxvii.  14. 


152 


DISTORT  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  9k 


portent;  Jbloio  strike  Jove  whom  ne  will f1  From  supernatu- 
ral terrors  he  reverted  again  and  again  to  earthly  fears  and 
suspicions.  Henceforward  the  tyrant  allowed  none  to  be 
admitted  to  his  presence  without  being  previously  searched; 
and  he  caused  the  ends  of  the  corridor  in  which  he  took  exer- 
cise to  be  lined  with  polished  marble,  to  reflect  the  image  of 
any  one  behind  him.2  At  the  same  time  he  inquired  anxious- 
ly into  the  horoscope  of  every  chief  whom  he  might  fear  as 
a possible  rival  or  successor.  Many,  it  was  said,  he  caused 
to  be  slain  on  the  intimations  thus  conveyed  to  him  of  sup- 
posed danger.  Cocceius  X erva,  the  senator  who  actually 
succeeded  him,  was  only  suffered  to  live  because,  though  the 
presage  of  his  destiny  might  excite  alarm,  Domitian  was 
assured  by  an  astrologer,  in  whom  he  specially  confided,  that 
he  was  doomed  to  die  very  shortly.3  Nerva’s  career  was  in- 
deed brief,  but  Domitian’s  proved  still  briefer.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  prince’s  enemies  were  equally  busy.  The  battle  of 
the  horoscopes  raged  without  and  within  the  palace.  Every 
one  who  hated  and  feared  the  tyrant,  every  one  who  hoped  to 
leap  into  his  place,  consulted  the  secrets  of  futurity.  The 
ruler  was  really  in  danger  when  hundreds,  perhaps  thousands, 
of  his  subjects  were  asking  how  long  he  was  to  live.  One 
inquirer  who  imprudently  announced,  on  the  German  frontier, 
the  moment  when  Domitian  should  perish  (a  prophecy  which 
was  in  fact  punctually  fulfilled),  was  sent  in  chains  to  Rome, 
interrogated,  and  sentenced.  At  the  last  moment  the  tyrant’s 
death  saved  him,  and  he  was  even  rewarded  with  a present 
from  the  successor.  Another,  it  seems,  had  uttered  a similar 
prediction  still  earlier.  Being  arrested  and  questioned,  he 
had  sought  to  confirm  the  assurance  of  his  prophetic  powers 
by  declaring  that  he  was  destined  himself  to  be  shortly  torn 
in  pieces  by  dogs.  To  falsify  this  prognostication  the  crimi 
nal  was  committed  to  the  flames;  but  the  rains  descended 

2 Suet.  Do'rriit.  15. ; Dion,  Ixvii.  16. 

2 Suet.  Domit.  14. : “ parietes  lapide  phengite  distinxit.”  For  the  phengites 
(<zjto  roil  <j>s)ryovg),  see  Plin.  Hist.  Hat.  xxxvi.  22. 

s Dion,  Ixvii.  15. 


A.  U.  849.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


153 


and  extinguished  them,  and  the  dogs  after  all  devoured  his 
body  as  it  lay  among  the  half-burnt  faggots.1 

This  dismal  incident  was  related  to  Domitian  at  supper. 
The  victim  of  superstition  had  long  since,  it  was  said,  pene- 
trated futurity,  and  ascertained  too  surely  the  Apprehensions 
year,  the  day,  the  hour  which  was  to  prove  fatal 
to  him.  He  had  learnt  too  that  he  was  to  die  by  fatal  secunty- 
the  sword.  Yespasian,  himself,  it  was  affirmed,  not  less 
addicted  to  the  diviner’s  art  in  his  own  and  his  children’s 
interests,  had  ascertained  the  precise  destiny  which  awaited 
his  son,  and  once,  when  the  young  Domitian  expressed  ap- 
prehension of  some  mushrooms  at  table,  had  told  him  that  he 
need  not  fear,  for  he  was  doomed  to  perish  by  steel,  not  by 
poison.  The  omens  were  now  closing  about  the  victim,  and 
his  terrors  became  more  importunate  and  overwhelming. 
Something,  he  exclaimed,  is  about  to  happen,  which  men 
shall  talk  of  all  the  world  over ! Drawing  a drop  of  blood 
from  a pimple  on  his  forehead,  May  this  be  all!  he  added. 
He  had  fixed  on  the  fifth  hour  of  that  very  day  as  the  direful 
period.  His  attendants,  to  reassure  him,  declared  that  the 
hour  had  passed.  Embracing  the  flattering  tale  with  alacrity, 
and  rushing  at  once  to  the  extreme  of  confidence,  he  an- 
nounced that  the  danger  was  over,  and  that  he  would  bathe 
and  dress  for  the  evening  repast.2  But  the  danger  was  just 
then  ripening  within  the  walls  of  the  palace.  The  mysteries 
there  enacted  few,  indeed,  could  penetrate,  and  the  account 
of  Domitian’s  fall  has  been  coloured  by  invention  and  fancy. 
The  story  that  a child,  whom  he  suffered  to  attend  in  his 
private  chamber,  found  by  chance  the  tablets  which  he  placed 
under  his  pillow,  and  that  the  empress,  on  inspecting  them, 
and  finding  herself,  with  his  most  familiar  servants,  desig- 
nated for  execution,  contrived  a plot  for  his  assassination,  is 
one  so  often  repeated  as  to  cause  great  suspicion.  But 
neither  can  we  accept  the  version  of  Philostratus,  who  would 
have  us  believe  that  the  murder  of  Domitian  was  the  deed 


1 Suet.  Dion,  11.  cc. 


Suet.  Domit.  15.  16. 


154 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  9R 


of  a single  traitor,  a freedman  of  Clemens,  named  Steplianus, 
who,  indignant  at  his  patron’s  death,  and  urged  to  fury  by 
the  sentence  on  his  patron’s  wife,  Domitilla,  rushed  alone 
into  the  tyrant’s  chamber,  diverted  his  attention  by  a frivo 
lous  pretence,  and  smote  him  with  the  sword  he  bore  con- 
cealed in  his  sleeve.  It  is  more  likely  that  the  design, 
however  it  originated,  was  common  to  several  of  the  house- 
hold, and  that  means  were  taken  among  them  to  disarm  the 
victim  and  baffle  his  cries  for  assistance.  Stephanus,  who  is 
said  to  have  excelled  in  personal  strength,  may  have  been 
employed  to  deal  the  blow;  for  not  more,  perhaps,  than  one 
attendant  would  be  admitted  at  once  into  the  presence. 
Domitian  as-  Struck  in  the  groin,  but  not  mortally,  Domitian 
Bassinated.  snatched  at  his  own  weapon,  but  found  the  sword 
removed  from  the  scabbard.  He  then  clutched  the  assassin’s 
dagger,  cutting  his  own  fingers  to  the  bone;  then  desperately 
thrust  the  bloody  talons  into  the  eyes  of  his  assailant,  and 
beat  his  head  with  a golden  goblet,  shrieking  all  the  time  for 
help.  Thereupon  rushed  in  Parthenius,  Maximus,  and  others, 
and  despatched  him  as  he  lay  writhing  on  the  pavement.1 

That  the  actual  occurrence  of  great  events  is  at  times 
revealed  by  divine  intuition  to  seers  and  prophets  at  a dis- 
The  act  re-  tance,  lias  been  a common  superstition.2 3  As  this 
«meetoalpoi-  catastrophe  was  portended  by  many  omens  be- 
lonius.  forehand,  so,  according  to  the  story,  at  the  mo- 

ment of  its  befalling  at  Rome,  the  sage  Apollonius,  the 
philosopher  of  Tyana,  himself  a reputed  wonder-worker,  had 
mounted  an  eminence  in  Ephesus,  and  there  calling  the 
people  around  him,  had  exclaimed  with  inspired  fervour, 
Well  done , Stephanus  ! bravo , Steplianus  ! slay  the  murder - 


1 Circumstantial  accounts  of  the  assassination  are  given  by  both  Dion  and 
Philostratus,  which  differ  principally  in  the  assertion  by  the  one  that  the 
attendants  rushed  in  at  their  master’s  cries,  and  slew  Stephanus  in  the  fray, 
while  the  other  says  that  they  helped  to  kill  the  emperor.  This  latter  version 
seems  to  correspond  with  the  slighter  notice  of  Suetonius.  See  Philostr.  Yit. 

Apollon,  viii.  25.;  Dion,  lxvii.  18. ; Suet.  Domit.  17. 

3 Comp.  Lucan,  Pharsal.  vii.  192. ; Herod,  ix.  69.,  on  the  battle  of  PlatEea 


A.  U.  849.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


155 


erf  Thou  hast  stricken  / thou  hast  wounded ; thou  hast 
slain  / And  this  is  true , declares  tlae  historian  Dion,  this , 
I say , is  true,  let  who  will  deny  it.  Dion’s  account  is  identi- 
cal with  that  of  the  biographer  Philostratus ; but  from  this 
earnest  asseveration  it  may  be  inferred  that  it  was  from  no 
single  source,  and  no  partial  authority,  that  the  historian 
liiinself  had  derived  it.  The  tradition,  whatever  else  may  be 
its  value,  seems  at  least  to  point  to  a wide-spread  animosity, 
or  possibly  a wide-spread  conspiracy,  against  the  tyrant 
whose  crimes  after  all  were  mostly  confined  to  the  narrow 
sphere  of  Rome,  and  who  may  not  unjustly  be  reputed  a 
discreet  and  able  governor  of  the  provinces.  But  Domitian 
had  made  himself  enemies  of  the  two  classes  who  jiossessed 
the  greatest  powen_to  blacken  his  memory.  The  nobles, 
whom  he  had  insulted  and  tormented,  poisoned,  no  doubt, 
the  sources  of  history  at  Rome ; and  the  philosophers,  whom 
ne  proscribed  in  the  capital,  spread  their  bitter  feelings 
against  him  far  and  wide  throughout  the  empire.  I can  only 
repeat  what  I have  said  before,  that  there  are  no  facts  to  set 
against  the  overwhelming  testimony  by  which  Domitian  is 
condemned;  but  the  moral  influence  of  the  philosophers  at 
this  period  was  felt  in  every  quarter,  and  we  know  that  in 
more  modern  times  a prince  would  with  difficulty  obtain  a 
hearing  from  posterity  who  had  given  mortal  offence  to  both 
his  nobility  and  his  clergy.1 

The  busts  and  coins  of  Domitian  concur  in  presenting  us 
with  a countenance  which  bears  a strong  family  resemblance 
to  those  of  the  elder  Flavii,  coarse  and  plebeian, 

^ t ^ OoDtrist 

but  at  the  same  time  handsome,  and  not  without  tween  the  heirs 

, to  the  purple, 

marks  ol  intellectual  power.  He  appears  to  have  and  the  elected 
been  vain  of  his  person,  and  to  have  suffered  prmcc8' 
much  vexation  from  the  baldness  which  his  countrymen  re- 

1 Suet.  Domit.  IT. : “occisus  est  quarto  decimo  Kal.  Oct.”  (Sept.  18,  a.  u, 
849,  a.  d.  96.)  Domitian  was  born  Sept.  24.  804,  and  commenced  his  reign 
Sept.  13.  834  ; he  perished,  therefore,  at  the  age  of  forty-five ; and  his  reign 
numbered  fifteen  years  and  five  days.  Comp.  Dion,  Ixvii.  1 8. 


156 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  96 


gardecl  as  a serious  blemish.  By  one  indeed  who  affected 
divinity  such  personal  defects  might  he  felt  as  real  disad- 
vantages, and  the  affectation  of  divinity,  partly  from  vanity, 
hut  still  more  from  policy,  is  the  key  to  much  of  the  conduct 
of  this  last  of  an  upstart  dynasty.  The  princes  who  inherited 
imperial  power  are  all  marked  with  a similar  impress.  Caius, 
Nero,  and  Domitian,  were  strongly  influenced  by  the  necessi- 
ty of  maintaining  the  charm  of  legitimacy,  in  default  of  a 
personal  claim,  as  their  title  to  power.  The  right  of  Julius 
and  Augustus  to  a primacy  among  the  Romans,  if  not  strictly 
definable,  was  generally  admitted  as  the  meed  of  genius,  or 
beauty,  or  even  of  might.  It  was  the  will  of  the  gods,  veri- 
fied by  manifest  desert,  and  placed  beyond  human  question. 
Tiberius  was  the  chosen  of  Augustus;  but  this  reflected  merit 
he  was  anxious  to  fortify  by  the  sanction  of  the  senate,  the 
representative  of  the  Roman  patriciate.  Galba  and  Vespa- 
sian had  been  formally  elected  by  the  fathers,  and  their 
patrons  had  sustained  their  choice  by  alleging,  in  token  of 
their  fitness,  the  divine  descent  of  both  the  one  and  the  other. 
These  were  the  emperors  of  the  senate ; they  maintained  for 
the  most  part  the  interests  of  the  order  in  its  struggles 
against  popular  or  military  encroachment.  But  the  princes 
who  were  born  in  the  purple  knew  that  the  principle  of  le- 
gitimacy was  obnoxious  to  the  caste  which  pretended  to  the 
right  of  election.  They  saw,  on  the  other  hand,  that  the 
notion  of  hereditary  claim,  which  was  scarcely  recognized  by 
the  old  Roman  law  in  cases  even  of  private  descent,  had 
a peculiar  charm  for  the  mixed  races  which  now  constituted 
the  nation,  and  struck  a chord  of  sympathy  wherever  the 
artificial  rules  of  the  early  republic  were  unknown  or  forgot- 
ten. Hence  the  legitimate  princes  instinctively  attached 
themselves  to  the  people,  and  entered  on  a career  of  mutual 
jealousy  with  the  nobles,  which,  after  repeated  acts  of  re- 
pression and  tyranny,  always  ended  in  their  overthrow  and 
slaughter.  When  Suetonius  tells  us  that  Domitian  devoted 
himself  to  studying  the  arts  of  Tiberius,  and  made  that  prince 


A.  U.  849.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


15? 


his  model,  he  is  thinking  only,  I believe,  of  the  deep  dissimu- 
lation in  which  he  proved  so  apt  an  imitator;  but  it  does  not 
seem  that  the  later  emperor,  whose  general  policy  was  that 
of  an  archaic  revival,  followed  in  other  respects  the  example 
of  the  earlier,  who  was  a hard  and  logical  materialist. 


1 58 


HISTOKY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


TA.  D.  9(1. 


CHAPTER  LXI1I. 


ACCESSION  OP  NERVA. — REACTION  AGAINST  THE  TYRANNY  OP  DOMITIAN  MODERATED 

BY  THE  CLEMENCY  OP  NERVA. THE  PILETORIANS  DEMAND  THE  PUNISHMENT 

OP  domitian’s  ASSASSINS. — ASSOCIATION  OP  TRAJAN  in  the  EMPIRE. — DEATH 

OP  NERVA,  A.  D.  98.  A.  U.  861. ORIGIN  AND  EARLY  CAREER  OF  TRAJAN. 

HIS  POSITION  AND  OPERATIONS  ON  THE  RHENISH  FRONTIER. ROMAN  FORTIFI- 

CATIONS BETWEEN  THE  RHINE  AND  DANUBE. — TRAJAN’S  MODERATION  AND 

POPULARITY  IN  ROME. PLINY’S  PANEGYRIC. EXPEDITION  AGANST  THE  DACIANS, 

A.  D.  101. TRAJAN  CROSSES  THE  DANUBE. — HIS  SUCCESSES  AND  TRIUMPH, 

A.  D.  103. SECOND  EXPEDITION,  A.  D.  104. BRIDGE  OVER  THE  DANUBE. 

CONQUEST  AND  ANNEXATION  OF  DACIA. — THE  ULPIAN  FORUM  AND  TRAJAN’S 

COLUMN  AT  ROME. — CONQUESTS  IN  ARABIA. TRAJAN’S  ARCHITECTURAL  WORKS 

IN  THE  CITY  AND  THE  PROVINCES. — VIGILANCE,  SPLENDOUR,  AND  ECONOMY 
OF  HIS  ADMINISTRATION. — HIS  PERSONAL  QUALITIES,  COUNTENANCE,  AND 

figure. — (a.  D.  96-115,  A.  u.  849-868.) 

DOMITIAN  had  fallen  in  the  recesses  of  his  palace  by  the 
hands  of  his  own  private  attendants ; hut  no  sooner  was 
the  blow  struck  than  it  appeared  how  wide  the 

Cocceius  Nerva 

elected  em-  conspiracy  had  reached,  how  far  the  conspirators 
senate/  plans  and  precautions  had  extended.  The  chiefs 
a.  i>.  96.  of  the  senate  had  evidently  consulted  together, 
^ u'  ’ and  ascertained  among  themselves  the  man  on 
whom  their  own  suffrages  could  he  united,  and  who  would 
be  at  the  same  time  acceptable  to  the  military  power  en- 
camped at  their  gates.  They  had  fixed  on  M.  Cocceius  Nerva, 
a man  well  versed  in  affairs,  an  accomplished  speaker  and 
writer,  and  whose  family  took  rank  among  the  official  no- 
bility.1 Though  he  had  attained  the  chief  magistracy,  he 

1 Martial  addressing  him  when  a private  citizen  speaks  favourably  of  his 
literary  accomplishments  (viii.  70.,  ix.  27.),  and  says  that  Nero  stood  in  awe  of 
his  poetical  genius.  He  was  twice  Consul,  in  *71  and  90.  Eutropius  adds  that 
he  was  “ nobiiitstis  mediae.” 


A.  U.  849.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


159 


had  not  hitherto  been  eminent  in  public  life,  nor  could  he 
pretend  to  superior  genius  or  striking  fitness  for  command ; 
his  birth  was  not  such  as  could  cast  a shade  on  the  represent- 
atives of  the  ancient  houses ; bis  character  was  not  of  the 
severe  and  antique  cast  which  would  rebuke  the  laxity  of  his 
voluptuous  courtiers  ; self-indulgent  if  not  vicious  himself,  he 
might  be  expected  to  tolerate  the  weaknesses  of  others,  while 
his  age  and  infirmities  would  dispose  him  to  study  his  own 
ease  by  yielding  to  the  influences  around  him.1  The  senators 
hoped  to  guide  him,  the  soldiers  could  hardly  fear  him ; but 
his  personal  appearance  was  agreeable  and  imposing,  and  in 
the  charm  which  soonest  wins  and  retains  longest  the  admi- 
ration of  the  populace,  he  might  hope  to  rival  Augustus  and 
Tiberius,  Nero  and  Titus. 

Such  was  the  ideal  of  a prince  conceived  at  this  epoch  by 
the  Roman  nobles.2  The  moment  was  an  important  turning- 
point  in  the  career  of  the  empire.  It  is  by  a 

1 . . . . . His  character 

mere  accident  indeed  that  the  series  of  imperial  and  preten- 
biographies  compiled  by  Suetonius  closes  with 
Domitian,  and  that  the  name  of  the  Caesars  is  commonly 
given,  by  way  of  eminence,  to  the  first  twelve  only  of  the 
Roman  emperors.  The  title  of  Caesar  continued,  I need 
hardly  repeat,  to  be  applied  to  the  chief  of  the  state  from 
age  to  age,  while  the  actual  blood  of  the  first  of  the  number 
was  exhausted,  as  we  have  seen,  in  Nero,  the  sixth  in  suc- 
cession. Nevertheless,  the  death  of  Domitian  and  the  acces- 
sion of  Nerva  form  a marked  epoch  in  our  history,  on  which 
we  shall  do  well  to  pause.  The  empire  now  enters  on  a new 
phase  of  its  existence.  Hitherto  the  idea  that  the  primacy 
was  due  to  the  most  excellent  man  in  the  commonwealth, 
which  easily  led  to  the  notion  of  the  emperor’s  divine  char- 
acter and  origin,  had,  except  in  the  transient  usurpations  of 

3 Dion,  Ixviii.  1. ; Victor,  Gees.  13.,  charges  him  with  excess  in  wine. 

5 No  doubt  it  might  be  said  of  Nerva,  as  was  said  before  of  Piso,  the  chief 
of  the  conspiracy  against  Nero:  “sed  procul  gravitas  morum  ....  idque 
pluribus  probabatur,  qui  in  tanta  vitiorum  dulcedine  summum  injperium  non  re- 
Btrictum  nec  perseverum  volunt.’"  Tac.  Ann.  xv.  48.  Comp,  also  Tac.  Hist.  ii.  37. 


160 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


TA.  D . 96. 


Otlio  and  Yitellius,  been  faithfully  preserved.  But  the  elec- 
tion of  Nerva  was  avowedly  a mere  matter  of  political  con- 
venience. The  senate  at  last  was  master  of  the  situation, 
and  it  rejected  pointedly  the  flimsy  notions  with  which  the 
nation  had  so  long  suffered  itself  to  be  amused.  Cocceius 
ISTerva  was  the  son  of  an  official,  the  grandson  of  a jurist,  the 
great  grandson  of  the  minister  of  Augustus.  His  ancestors 
and  all  their  affinities,  for  several  generations,  were  well 
known  to  the  senators,  and  they  were  very  sure  that  no  drop 
of  celestial  ichor  had  ever  flowed  in  the  veins  of  any  one  of 
them.  Though  the  family  had  been  settled  in  Italy  for  a 
hundred  years,  it  was  known  to  have  come  over  from  Crete, 
where  centuries  before  it  had  been  planted  by  an  Italian 
progenitor.1  For  the  first  time  the  emperor  of  the  Romans 
was  neither  a Julius  nor  a Claudius,  nor  a Domitius,  nor 
even  a Flavius,  all  ancient  names  of  Latium  or  Sabellia ; he 
was  not  the  son  of  a god,  nor  the  remotest  descendant  of  one ; 
he  was  not  even  in  popular  acceptance  a Roman  or  an  Italian, 
but  a provincial  by  origin.  The  pedants  of  a later  age,  and 
probably  the  pedants  of  that  age  itself,  remarked  apologet- 
ically that  the  first  of  the  Tarquins,  the  best  and  wisest  of 
the  Roman  kings,  had  been  not  a Roman  but  an  Etruscan  ; 
and  they  added  truly  that  Rome  had  flourished  by  the  for- 
eign virtues  she  had  grafted  upon  the  parent  stock.2  But  it 

1 Victor,  Cces.  12.:  “quid  enim  Nerva  Cretensi  prudentius.”  In  the  Epi- 
tome lie  is  styled  “Namiensis,”  and  this  word  some  of  the  commentators  would 
restore  in  the  passage  above  cited.  There  is,  indeed,  no  other  authority  for 
the  presumed  foreign  origin  of  Nerva ; but  both  in  the  Ccesars  and  the  Epitome , 
Victor  remarks  particularly  that  hitherto  all  the  emperors  were  either  Roman 
by  origin  or  at  least  Italian,  as  Otho  and  Vespasian : “hactenus  Romse,  seu 
per  Italiam  orti  imperium  rexere : hinc  advenas.”  The  foreign  extraction  of 
Nerva’s  successors  generally  is  well  ascertained.  I have  little  doubt,  therefore, 
that  “ Cretensis  ” is  Victor’s  word. 

2 Victor,  Cces.  11.  (Comp.  Epit.  11.):  “plane  compertum  urbem  Romam 
extemorum  virtute  atque  insitivis  artibus  prtecipue  erevisse.”  Martial  has  two 
brilliant  panegyrics  on  Nerva : xi.  5.,  xii.  6.  He  compares  him  to  Numa, 
bespeaks  for  him  the  reverence  of  the  old  Roman  heroes,  and  declares  finally 
that  now  at  last, 


“ Si  Cato  reddatur,  CEesarianus  erit.’ 


A.  U.  849.] 


UKDER  THE  EMPIRE- 


161 


was  felt  on  all  hands  that  a great  revolution  had  practically 
been  accomplished.  The  transition  from  Domitian  to  Xerva 
may  he  compared  to  the  descent  in  our  own  history  from 
James  to  William,  from  the  principle  of  divine  right  to  the 
principle  of  compact  and  convention. 

The  private  career  of  Xerva  had  been  that  of  his  class 
generally.  His  disposition  was  naturally  good,  his  under- 
standing; excellent  and  well  cultivated,  his  morals 

& . ...  .„  ’ Doubtful  atti- 

pliant ; his  ambition,  if  such  he  had,  had  been  tude  of  the  ie- 
kept  under  strict  control,  and,  satisfied  with  the 
dignities  to  which  he  could  safely  aspire,  he  had  refrained 
from  exciting  his  master’s  jealousy.  He  had  thus  reached  in 
safety  and  good  repute  the  ripe  age  of  sixty-five,  or,  accord- 
ing to  some  accounts,  seventy  years.  But  Xerva  was  older 
in  constitution  than  in  years  ; the  luxury  in  which  he  had 
indulged  may  have  impaired  his  vital  forces,  and  he  now  suf- 
fered perhaps  for  his  imprudence  by  excessive  weakness  of 
digestion.  In  choosing  him  for  their  prince,  the  nobles,  too 
timid  themselves  to  dispute  the  throne  with  Domitian,  may 
have  looked  to  another  proximate  vacancy,  when  the  succes- 
sion might  be  environed  with  fewer  perils.  The  praetorians 
seem  to  have  felt  no  regard  for  the  Flavian  dynasty,  which 
had  never  condescended  to  humour  them.  The  legions  on 
the  Danube,  to  whom  Domitian  was  personally  known,  and 
whose  officers  were  of  his  direct  appointment,  murmured, 
and  threatened  to  mutiny  at  his  fall ; 1 but  the  army  of  the 
Rhine  was  controlled  by  a brave  and  faithful  commander, 
whose  influence  extended  perhaps  even  further  than  his  au- 
thority ; a commander  whose  merits  should  have  gained  him 
the  election  of  the  senate  without  a competitor,  had  tran- 
scendent merit  been  the  object  of  its  search.  It  remained  for 
Xerva  to  offer  soon  afterwards  a share  in  the  supreme  power 
to  tne  man  to  whose  loyal  support  he  owed  no  doubt  his  own 
tranquil  succession.  We  shall  soon  arrive  at  the  association 

1 Philostr.  Vit  Sophist,  i.  1.,  where  the  soldiers  are  said  to  have  been 
recalled  to  their  duty  by  the  persuasive  eloquence  of  the  sophist  Dion  Chrvsos- 
tomus. 


162 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMAYS 


[A.  D.  96. 


of  Trajan  in  the  empire.  We  must  first  notice  the  circum- 
stances of  alarm  and  perplexity  which  compelled  the  new 
ruler,  whom  the  senate  and  army  had  just  chosen  with  ac- 
clamations, to  strengthen  his  weak  hands  by  resorting  to  this 
magnanimous  assistant. 

Domitian’s  body  lay  unheeded  on  his  chamber  floor,  till 
it  was  removed  by  the  pious  care  of  his  nurse  Phyllis,  and 
indignities  borne  on  a common  bier  by  hired  hands  to  his 
memory  o/do-  suburban  villa  on  the  Latin  Way.  From  thence 
mitian.  his  ashes  were  privily  conveyed  to  the  temple  of 

the  Flavian  family,  and  placed  beside  those  of  his  niece 
J ulia.1 2  The  people,  who  witnessed  with  unconcern  the  trans- 
fer of  power  to  a new  dynasty,  took  no  interest  in  these 
humble  obsequies,  which  the  nobles,  though  fully  resolved 
that  the  third  of  the  Flavii  should  not  share  in  the  divine 
honours  of  his  father  and  brother,  did  not  care  to  interrupt. 
In  the  Curia  indeed  the  tyrant’s  fall  was  hailed  with  tumultu- 
ous rejoicings.  The  fathers  broke  out  in  execrations  and 
contumelies  against  him,  placed  ladders  against  the  walls, 
and  tore  down  his  images  and  trophies.  The  city  had  been 
thronged  with  his  statues,  which  now  fell  in  the  general  pro- 
scription ; those  of  marble  were  ground  to  powder,  those  of 
gold,  silver  and  bronze,  were  melted  down,  and  among  them 
doubtless  the  noble  colossus  in  the  forum.  The  name  of  Do- 
mitian  was  effaced  on  every  monument,  and  possibly  his  arch 
of  triumph  overthrown,  as  well  as  the  Janus-arches  with 
which  he  had  decorated  the  thoroughfares.3 


1 Suet.  Domit.  17. ; Dion,  lxvii.  18 

2 Suet.  Domit.  23. ; Plm.  Paneg.  52. ; Dion,  lxviii.  1.  Gruter  gives  several 

inscriptions  in  which  Domitian’s  name  is  erased.  The  Senate  refused  to  enrol 
their  latest  tyrant  among  the  national  divinities  ; but  they  did  not  carry  their 
resentment  to  the  memory  of  his  predecessors.  The  Flavian  temple  in  the 
forum  was  allowed  to  stand,  and  perpetuate  the  cult  of  Vespasian  and  Titus  to 
a late  age.  It  was  burnt  and  again  restored  a hundred  years  afterwards. 
Possibly  the  destruction  of  Domitian’s  monuments  was  not  so  complete  as  it  is 
represented ; at  least  Procopius  declares  that  he  saw  a bronze  statue  of  this 
prince  erect  in  his  own  day,  on  the  right  hand  of  the  ascent  to  the  Capitol  from 
the  forum.  Procop.  Hist.  Arcan.  8. 


A.U.  849.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


183 


But  the  effervescence  of  popular  exultation  was  directed 
to  more  important  objects.  The  exiles  of  the  late  proscrip- 
tion were  recalled  with  acclamation,  and  this  in-  Eeca]1  of  tl)e 
dulgence  embraced  the  philosophers  as  well  as  exiles- 
the  political  sufferers.1  There  arose  a general  cry  against 
the  instruments  of  the  tyrant’s  cruelty,  and  vengeance  was 
demanded  on  the  delators,  among  whom  were  Prosecution  of 
senators,  pnetors,  and  consulars.  Nerva,  discreet  delators- 
and  mild,  would  have  been  content  with  staying  all  the  suits 
then  in  progress,  with  reversing  all  sentences  in  force  against 
Domitian’s  victims,  and  compensating,  as  far  as  possible 
those  who  had  suffered ; but  the  time-servers  who  had  crouch- 
ed most  ignobly  under  the  late  tyranny  were  now  the  loud- 
est in  invoking  punishment  on  its  ministers,  and  attacked 
their  foes  with  a violence  not  inferior  to  that  which  they  had 
themselves  endured.2  Those  who  had  no  personal  wrongs  to 
avenge  resented  the  ill-treatment  of  friends  and  connexions. 
Pliny,  who  had  risen  high  under  Domitian,  seized  the  occa- 
sion to  distinguish  himself.  His  vanity  does  not  r]jru.,g  attack 
allow  us  to  give  him  credit  for  disinterestedness.  011  Certus- 


It  was  a fine  opportunity,  so  he  himself  proclaims,  for  at- 
tacking the  guilty,  for  avenging  the  innocent,  for  advancing 
oneself. 3 Of  all  the  enormities  of  the  tyrant’s  creatures,  none, 
he  says,  had  been  greater  than  that  of  Certus,  who  had  act- 
ually laid  hands  in  the  Curia  on  the  noble  Helvidius.  With 
Helvidius  Pliny  was  connected  in  friendship,  and  they  had 
common  friends  in  the  Fannias  and  Arrias,  the  noble  consorts 
of  the  Psetuses  and  Thraseas.  Pliny  assails  Certus  in  the 


1 The  ecclesiastical  tradition  that  St.  John  was  recalled  on  this  occasion 

from  his  exile  in  Patmos  (Euseb.  Hist.  Heel.  iii.  20. ; Oros.  vii.  11.)  seems  to 
be  reflected  from  the  popular  recollection  of  this  recall  of  the  philosophers. 
The  proscriptions  of  Domitian  and  the  rehabilitations  of  Nerra  refer  simply  to 
Rome  or  Italy. 

3 Plin.  Ep.  ix.  18.:  “ae  primis  quidem  diebus  redditce  libertaiis  pro  se 
quisque  inimicos  suos  incondito  turbidoque  more  postulaverant,  simul  et  oppres- 
serant.” 

3 Plin.  1.  c. : “ materiam  inseetandi  nocentes,  miseros  vindicandi,  se  pr& 
ferendi .” 


164 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.D.  9(5, 


senate ; the  culprit  dares  not  appear ; his  friends  in  vain  ex- 
cuse or  intercede  for  him  in  the  face  of  the  indignant  fathers. 


Nerva  refrains  indeed  from  moving  the  assembly  to  institute 
a process  against  him,  but  refuses  him  the  consulship,  and 
even  supersedes  him  in  the  prsetorshxp.  Certus  dies  within 
a few  days ; of  mortification,  it  may  be  hoped ; for  thus 
much  at  least  is  popularly  known,  that  the  image  of  Pliny, 
sword  in  hand,  ever  floated  from  that  moment  before  him  in 
his  disturbed  imagination.1 2  The  moderation  which  Nerva 
prescribed  to  himself  in  regard  to  this  great  criminal  seems 
to  have  marked  his  dealings  with  all  the  class,  and  the  vic- 
tims of  the  delators  were  probably  little  satisfied  with  the 
amount  of  favour  they  experienced  from  him.  They  had 
yet  to  wait  for  a prince  of  firmer  hand  or  harsher  character 
for  the  full  revenge,  which  was  not  long  in  arriving.  Much, 
however,  as  the  nobles  feared  the  treachery  and  falsehood  of 
accusers  among  their  own  order,  they  lived  in  more  constant 


Clemency  of 
Nerva. 


dread  of  the  denunciations  of  their  retainers.  It 
was  hailed  as  a great  safeguard  of  their  lives  and 


honour,  when  Nerva  once  more  forbade  the  admission  of  a 
slave’s  testimony  against  his  master,  or  even  of  a freedman 
against  his  patron.5  The  edict  of  Titus  against  false  accusa- 
tions was  revived  with  additional  penalties.  One  more  pledge 
was  necessary  to  restore  the  entire  confidence  of  the  fathers. 
Nerva  came  forward  of  his  own  accord,  and  vowed  that  no 
member  of  the  order  should  suffer  death  under  his  adminis- 
tration. Then,  and  not  till  then,  could  Pronto,  a distinguished 
senator,  interpose  to  arrest  the  torrent  of  prosecution,  and 
demand  a general  amnesty.  It  is  ill , he  said,  to  have  a 
prince  under  whom  no  one  may  do  anything  ; but  worse  to 
have  one  who  lets  every  one  do  as  he  will.3 * 


1 Plin.  1.  c.  He  continues : “ verane  hsec,  adfirmare  non  ausim  ; interest 
tamen  exempli  ut  vera  videantur.” 

2 It  is  especially  mentioned  that  Nerva  forbade  slaves  to  accuse  their  mas- 
ters of  “ Jewish  manners.”  Dion,  lxviii.  1. 

3 Dion,  1.  c.  Eeimar  believes  him  to  have  been  C.  Julius  Fronto,  and  consul 

in  99  ; Clinton  styles  him  Cornelius,  and  places  his  consulship  in  100. 


A.  U.  849.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


165 


Such  free  speaking  in  the  august  presence  was  as  rare  as 
the  clemency  to  which  it  pointed,  and  the  historian  who 
relates  it  immediately  subjoins  the  remark,  that 

. . . Nerva’s  moder- 

Nerva  was  weak  m health  and  constitution  ation  mingled 

. . . . with  timidity. 

leaving  us  to  inter  that  there  was  some  want  ot 
intellectual  and  moral  vigour  also  in  a prince  who  could 
listen  so  complacently  and  act  so  gently.  Such  indeed  was 
Nerva’s  timidity,  that  on  a report  of  Domitian  being  yet 
alive,  he  is  said  to  have  been  quite  unmanned,  and  only  sus- 
tained through  the  crisis  by  the  resolution  of  his  immediate 
attendants.1  However  this  may  be,  Nerva  continued  to  act 
throughout  his  brief  career  with  a consistent  moderation, 
which  was  founded,  we  may  hope,  on  principle.  He  forbade 
statues  to  be  made  of  himself  in  the  precious  metals.  He 
restored,  as  far  as  possible,  to  their  proper  owners  the  estates 
and  fortunes  which  Domitian  had  confiscated.  He  divided 
portions  of  land  among  needy  citizens  in  the  spirit  of  the 
republican  legislation,  and  was  the  first  to'  devise  a scheme, 
which  received  ample  development  under  his  successors,  for 
relieving  the  poor  by  a state  provision  for  their  children.2  To 
meet  these  extraordinary  expenses  he  sold  great  masses  of 
imperial  property,  the  accumulated  furniture  of  his  palaces, 
vestments,  jewels,  and  pleasure-houses,  distributing  at  the 
same  time  liberal  presents  among  his  Mends.  The  more 
sober  portion  of  the  citizens  were  not  displeased  at  his  re- 
trenching the  expenditure  in  games  and  spectacles,  and  for- 
bidding so  much  blood  to  be  shed  in  the  amphitheatre,  while 
he  gratified  the  populace  by  allowing  the  return  of  the 
mimes.3  He  owed  it  perhaps  to  the  briefness  of  his  tenure 
of  power  that  he  was  enabled,  liked  Titus  before  him,  to 
keep  his  vow  not  to  cause  the  death  of  a senator,  and  the 

1 Victor,  Epit.  12. 

2 Dion,  lxviii.  2.  Nerva  founded  or  restored  colonies  at  Scylacium  and 
Verulas  in  Italy,  and  Sitifa  in  Mauretania.  Zumpt,  Comm.  Epigr.  i.  899. 
Victor,  Epit.  12.:  “puellas  puerosque  natos  parentibus  egentibus  surnptu 
publico  per  Italias  oppida  ali  jussit.” 

3 Nerva  forbade  the  single  combats  of  the  Gladiators.  Zonar.  xi.  20. 


166 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  97 


favour  in  which  he  was  held  by  the  nobles  shines  forth  in  the 
famous  panegyric  of  their  spokesman  Tacitus,  that  he  recon- 
ciled the  two  conflicting  political  principles,  the  authority 
of  the  prince,  and  the  freedom  of  the  people.1  The  Romans 
indeed  took  pleasure  in  comparing  him  with  the  virtuous  son 
of  Vespasian,  and  the  story  told  of  Titus  that  he  put  swords 
in  the  hands  of  suspected  conspirators,  to  show  his  just  con- 
fidence in  his  own  merit,  was  now  repeated,  whether  truly 
or  not,  of  Nerva.2  Nor  was  it  forgotten,  however,  that  this 
good  ruler  took  care  to  confirm  the  best  measures  even  of  the 
monster  Domitian,  and  particularly  the  edict  against  mutila- 
tion.3 On  reviewing  his  career,  Nerva  could  boast  with 
justice  that  he  had  committed  no  act  which  should  prevent 
him  from  abdicating,  if  he  thought  fit,  in  perfect  security. 
Nevertheless  he  did  not  escape,  even  during  his  lifetime, 
some  harsh  reflections  on  a clemency  so  ill  appreciated.  One 
evening  Mauricus,  just  returned  from  banishment,  was  sup- 
ping with  him.  Among  the  guests  was  Veiento,  mentioned 
above  among  the  vilest  of  Domitian’s  creatures,  who  had 
made  himself  bitter  enemies  by  his  zeal  in  denouncing  and 
prosecuting  the  noblest  Romans.  The  conversation  fell  on 
the  subject  of  Catullus,  then  lately  deceased,  whose  pander- 
ing to  the  jealous  humours  of  Domitian  has  been  already 
mentioned.  Were  Catullus  now  alive,  said  Nerva,  what 
would  his  fate  be?  lie  would  be  supping  with  us,  rejoined 
the  free-spoken  Mauricus,  with  a glance  at  the  odious  de- 
lator.4 

1 Tac.  Agric.  3. : “ res  olim  dissociabiles  miscuerit,  principatum  et  liber- 
tatem.” 

2 Dion,  lxviii.  2. 

3 Dion,  1.  c.  Nerva  is  said  to  have  forbidden  the  marriage  of  uncles  with 
their  brothers’  daughters,  a licentious  innovation  which  Domitian,  as  we  have 
seen,  had  discountenanced.  All  the  tyrant’s  legislation  would  probably  have 
been  swept  away  had  not  his  best  enactments  or  views  been  sustained  by  his 
successor. 

4 Plin.  Ep.  iv.  22.  For  the  cause  of  Domitian’s  animosity  to  Junius  Mam 
ricus,  see  Tac.  Hist.  iv.  40.,  and  for  his  banishment  Agric.  45.  He  was  brothe/ 
of  Arulenus  Rusticus,  and  suffered  in  the  proscription  of  the  year  93. 


A.  U.  850. J 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


167 


On  the  whole  the  senators  were  well  satisfied  with  the 
prince  they  had  set  up,  and  they  allowed  his  merits  to  he 
blazoned  forth  without  a breath  of  detraction. 

Conspiracy  of 

The  name  of  Nerva  has  been  associated  in  after  Caipumiusde- 

feated. 

ages  with  the  mildness  of  age,  and  the  charm  of 
paternal  government.1  Nevertheless  he  did  not  escape  the 
penalty  of  his  station.  Plots  were  formed  against  him,  to 
which  even  his  good  qualities,  connected  as  they  might  seem 
to  be  with  some  weakness  of  character,  may  have  partly  con- 
duced. An  attempt  was  made  to  overthrow  him  by  a certain 
Calpurnius  Crassus,  who  boasted  his  descent  from  the  family 
of  the  triumvir,  and  whose  haughty  temper,  though  controlled 
by  the  firmer  hand  of  preceding  despots,  could  not  brook  the 
supremacy  of  one  of  his  own  class,  no  more,  as  he  himself 
professed,  than  the  first  of  the  senators.  This  conspiracy, 
however,  was  easily  suppressed.  The  nobles  of  the  city,  even 
had  they  generally  wished  it,  had  long  lost  the  art  of  con- 
spiring. It  would  seem  that  only  freedmen  and  soldiers 
could  now  overthrow  an  emperor.  Nerva,  faithful  to  his 
promise,  declined  to  take  the  life  of  his  enemy,  and  merely 
banished  him  to  the  pleasant  retreat  of  Tarentum.2  But  a 
greater  danger  beset  the  prince  of  the  senators  from  another 
quarter.  When  the  nobles  were  satisfied  the  soldiers  were 
generally  discontented.  Casperius  iEliauus,  pre-  Mutiny  0f  tlie 
feet  of  the  praetorians  under  the  last  emperor,  wiwdemand 
whom  Nerva  had  allowed  to  retain  his  important  o^DomitWs114 
post,  excited  the  guards  of  the  palace  against  his  assassins- 
too  generous  master,  and  encouraged  them  to  demand  the 
blood  of  Domitian’ s assassins.  No  inquiry,  it  seems,  had 
been  made  into  the  act  which  had  freed  the  Romans  from 
their  odious  yoke ; the  perpetrators  of  the  deed  had  not  been 
punished,  but  neither  had  they  been  rewarded.  It  was 
enough  that  the  deed  was  done,  a deed  of  bad  example  for 
princes,  yet  such  as  both  the  prince  and  the  people  might 
fairly  turn  to  their  own  advantage.  Perhaps,  had  the  assas- 

1 Auson.  Oces.  13. : “Nerva  senex,  princeps  nomine,  mente  parens.” 

3 Dion,  lxviii.  3. ; Victor,  1.  c. 


168 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


I A.  D.  97. 


sins  been  citizens,  they  would  have  been  hailed  with  public 
demonstrations  of  gratitude,  like  the  tyrannicides  of  earlier 
days;  but  the  act  of  slaves  or  freedmen  was  decorously 
passed  over  in  silence,  Herva,  however,  opposed  himself  to 
this  threatened  violence  with  a noble  courage.  He  bared  his 
neck  to  the  praetorians,  whose  fury  he  had  n©  means  of  resist- 
ing, and  offered  himself  as  a sacrifice  in  place  of  then1 2  victims. 
But  Casperius  was  master,  at  least  for  a moment,  and  directed 
the  slaughter,  without  form  of  trial,  of  Parthenius,  and  such 
of  his  associates  as  could  be  arrested.1  When  the  deed  was 
done,  nothing  remained  for  the  emperor  but  to  make  such 
excuse  for  it  in  public  as  the  circumstances  admitted.  It 
might  be  represented  as  the  hasty  explosion  of  mistaken 
zeal,  of  extravagant  loyalty,  of  blind  devotion  to  the  military 
sacrament.  To  the  new  emperor  and  to  his  well-wishers,  the 
senate  and  people  of  Rome,  it  was  a pledge  that  a life  dear 
to  the  interests  of  peace  and  freedom  should  be  well  protected 
or  signally  avenged.  But,  whatever  he  might  say  in  public, 
Nerva  felt  in  his  heart  the  disgrace  of  being  thus  controlled, 
an  imperator  by  his  soldiers,  and  resolved,  if  he  could  not 
punish  this  outbreak,  at  least  never  to  subject  himself  to  such 
Nerva  adopts  another.  He  addressed  a letter  to  Ulpius  Tra- 
associates  him  janus,  then  commanding  on  the  Rhine,  offering 
in  the  empire,  {j  jin  a share  in  the  empire,  and  invoking  him, 
according  to  the  story,  with  a verse  of  Homer,  to  exact 
retribution  in  arms  from  the  Greeks  for  the  tears  they  had 
drawn  from  his  sovereign.3  Without  awaiting  a reply,  1ST erva 
ascended  the  Capitol,  and  convening  the  citizens  before  the 
temple  of  Jupiter,  proclaimed  his  new  colleague  as  his  own 
adopted  son,  with  the  words,  I hereby  adopt  M.  Ulpius 
Nerva  Trajanus : may  the  gods  bless  therein  the  senate,  the 

1 Dion,  1.  c. ; Victor,  Epit.  24. : “ sed  neglecto  principe  requisites  jugula- 
rere.”  Plin.  Paneg.  6. : “ magnum  illud  sasculo  dedecus  : magnum  reipublic® 
vulnus  impressum  est.  Imperator  et  parens  generis  humani  obsessus,  captus, 
mclusus  : ablata  mitissimo  seni  servandorum  hominum  potestas.”  It  must  be 
remembered  that  Pliny  uses  all  the  emporors  as  foils  to  his  own  patron  Trajan 

2 Dion,  1.  c. : rtoeiav  A avaol  tga  daupva  aolai  PeXegcu. 


A.  U.  850.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


1G9 


people , and  myself.  This  act  he  again  ratified  with  legal 
solemnities  in  the  curia,1  the  nobles  admitting  without  demur 
the  exercise  by  the  emperor  of  the  rights  common  to  every 
father  of  a Roman  family,  though  in  this  case  it  implied  no 
less  than  a pledge  of  the  imperial  succession.  Their  habitual 
deference  to  legal  principles  could  not  have  blinded  them  to 
the  political  disability  they  thus  practically  imposed  upon 
themselves.  Henceforth,  the  power  of  adoption,  with  all  its 
legitimate  consequences,  was  regularly  claimed  by  the  reign- 
ing emperor,  and  after-ages  acknowledged  the  wisdom  with 
which  for  generations  it  was  exercised.2  The  aged  emperor 
was  thus  confirmed  on  his  throne.  The  turbulent  guards  of 
the  city  trembled  before  the  legions  of  a resolute  chief,  and 
shrank  back  into  their  camp.  ISTerva  had  mated  T,  , 
his  assailants : but  his  own  game  was  now  nearly  va, 
played  out,  and  he  enjoyed  but  a short  breathing  a. 
space  of  ease  and  security  before  his  death,  which 
happened  on  the  23d  of  January,  98,  after  a reign  of  sixteen 
months  and  a few  days  only. 

The  little  our  records  have  transmitted  to  us  of  the  life 
and  qualities  of  Herva  can  be  but  inadequately  supplied  by 
the  testimony  of  busts  and  medals  to  his  per- 

Personal  ap- 

sonal  appearance ; nevertheless  none  of  the  em-  pearance  of 
perors  is  more  vividly  characterized  in  the  effigies 
which  remain  of  him.  The  representations  of  ISTerva  in 
marble  are  numerous,  and  rank  among  the  most  interesting 
monuments  we  possess  of  this  description.  Among  the 
treasures  of  antiquity  preserved  in  modern  Rome  none  sur- 
passes, none  perhaps  equals,  in  force  and  dignity,  the  sitting 
statue  of  this  emperor,  which  draws  all  eyes  in  the  Rotunda 

1 Dion,  1.  c.  The  adoption  took  place  in  October,  97. 

2 Claudian,  xxviii.  417. : 

“ Hie  illi  mansere  viri,  quos  mutua  virtus 
Legit,  et  in  nomen  Romanis  rebus  adopians 
Judicio  pulcram  seriem,  non  sanguine  duxit. 

Hie  proles  atavum  deducens  HHia  Nervam, 

Tanquillique  Pii,  bellatoresque  Seven.” 


123 


170 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  98 


of  the  Yatican,  embodying  the  highest  ideal  of  the  Roman 
magnate,  the  finished  warrior,  statesman,  and  gentleman  of 
an  age  of  varied  training  and  wide  practical  experience.1 
Such  a figure  an  Englishman  might  claim  with  pride  as  the 
effigy  of  a governor-general  of  half  a continent.  Unfortu- 
nately, we  are  too  little  acquainted  with  the  original  to  pro- 
nounce on  its  agreement  with  his  actual  character ; and  we 
could  wish  that  it  had  come  to  us  as  the  portrait  of  an  Agri- 
cola,— of  one  whose  magnanimity  we  accept  on  trust  from 
the  panegyric  of  Tacitus.  We  do  not  hear,  indeed,  of  iSTerva 
that  he  ever  commanded  in  the  provinces,  or  led  an  army 
against  the  foes  of  the  empire ; nor,  in  sooth,  can  he  be  ab- 
solved from  the  charge  of  vices,  common  to  the  idle  and 
luxurious  of  his  rank  and  class,  which  in  better  and  healthier 
times  would  argue  great  moral  degradation ; yet,  if  we  really 
contemplate  his  likeness  in  the  noble  figure  in  the  Yatican, 
we  may  fairly  say  of  the  prince  as  the  historian  affirms  of 
the  general:  you  might  easily  deem  him  good ; you  woidd 
willingly  believe  him  great? 

Your  filial  love , most  venerable  imperator , made  you  wish 
your  succession  to  be  long  retarded ; but  the  gods  were  eager 
to  advance  your  virtues  to  the  helm  of  state,  which 
you  had  promised  to  direct.  This  being  so,  I 
invoice  all  happiness  on  yourself  and  on  mankind, 
as  befits  the  age  which  is  illustrated  by  your  name.  For  my 
own  sake,  and  for  the  peoples  sake,  I pray  for  your  health  both 
in  mind  and  body?  Such  is  the  form  of  congratulation  with 


Nerva’s  merit 
In  adopting 
l’rajan. 


1 The  antiquity  of  this  remarkable  statue  is  acknowledged.  It  is  asserted, 
however,  that  the  upper  and  lower  halves,  the  one  naked,  the  other  draped, 
did  not  originally  belong  to  the  same  figure.  Meyer  on  Winckelmann,  Gesch. 
der  Kunst , &c.,  xi.  Buch.  3.  Kap. 

2 Tac.  Agric.  44. : “ quod  si  habitum  quoque  ejus  posteri  noscere  velint, 
decentior  quam  sublimior  fuit ; nihil  metus  in  vultu,  gratia  oris  supererat ; 
bonum  virum  facile  crederes,  magnum  libenter.”  Comp.  Julian.  Ccesar. : 
itapfpStv  ’em  rovroig  ytpov  btydijvai  naXoc — Xapirei  yap  toTiv  5re  ical  tv  to 
yt/pg  to  KaXXog — IvtvxsIv  irpgdTctTOQ , xt)7UlaT'LCSal  diKaidraroc. 

8 Plin.  Ep.  x.  1.  This  is  the  first  of  a series  of  letters  which  embraces  the 
correspondence  between  Pliny  and  Trajan,  and  gives  us  a curious  insight  into 
the  manners  of  the  times,  and  the  relation  of  the  prince  to  his  people. 


A.  U.  851.  j 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


171 


which  Pliny  hails  the  consummation  of  his  friend’s  greatness, 
when  the  lately-adopted  son  and  associate  of  the  deceased 
Nerva  was  acknowledged  by  the  senate  and  people  as  his 
legitimate  successor.  ISTerva’s  career  had  been  too  brief  to 
forfeit  the  hopes  entertained  of  his  clemency  and  discretion, 
but  it  allowed  him  to  perform  the  one  act  by  which  he  is  dis- 
tinguished among  the  Caesars,  the  act  by  which  he  earned 
the  blessings  of  his  people,  and  secured  the  approbation  of  a 
late  posterity.  The  choice  he  made  of  Trajan  for  his  asso- 
ciate and  heir  was  full,  even  at  the  time,  of  happy  augury ; 
and  when  he  was  suddenly  removed  but  a few  months  later, 
the  Romans  were  satisfied  with  the  prospect  he  bequeathed 
them,  and  transferred  their  vows  of  allegiance,  without  a 
murmur  or  a misgiving,  to  one  whom  they  fully  believed  to 
be  the  best  and  bravest  of  his  countrymen.  This  loyal  ac- 
ceptance of  the  legitimate  consequences  of  their  own  act  was 
creditable  to  the  sense  and  feeling  of  the  Roman  nobles ; for 
it  cannot  be  doubted  that,  had  Fiery  a made  himself  an  ob- 
ject of  detestation,  they  would  have  repudiated  his  adoption 
as  easily  as  any  other  of  the  legal  acts  of  his  principate. 
They  proceeded  to  mark  their  respect  and  gratitude  even 
more  strongly,  by  reviving  in  his  favour  the  rite  of  deifica- 
tion which  they  had  refused  to  Domitian.  To  such  a distinc- 
tion 1ST erva,  in  theory  only  the  first  of  the  citizens,  could  have 
no  such  pretensions  as  a Julius,  or  even  a Flavius.  But  the 
inconsequence  of  the  proceeding  might  easily  be  overlooked, 
especially  if  Trajan,  as  we  may  suppose,  himself  solicited  it. 
The  act  itself  had  now  doubtless  lost  some  portion  of  its 
earlier  significance,  and  henceforth  the  claims  of  deceased 
princes  to  divinity  were  regarded  as  purely  political. 

M.  FI  pi  us  Trajanus,  wThose  conduct  in  the  purple  has 
placed  him  in  the  foremost  rank  among  the  heroes  of  history, 
is  little  known  to  us  before  his  elevation,  and  we  origin  of  the 
may  not  at  first  sight  perceive  the  grounds  of  the  ™J,r><a™j 
favour  in  which  he  was  already  held  by  his  con-  of  his  father- 
temporaries.1  The  Ulpian  Gens,  to  which  he  was  attached, 

1 Eutropius,  viii.  2.,  alone  gives  him  the  additional  name  of  Cricitus : 


172 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  98. 


though  reputed  ancient,  was  obscure,  nor  had  it  contributed 
a single  name  to  the  Fasti.  But  the  Traian  Gens,  from  which 
some  ancestor  of  the  emperor  had  passed  by  adoption  into 
the  Ulpian,  was,  perhaps,  still  less  known;  and  even  after 
the  greatness  and  virtues  of  Trajan  had  drawn  attention  to 
it,  historians  and  biographers  could  say  no  more  of  his  family 
than  that  it  was  probably  transplanted  from  Italy  to  Spain, 
when  Scipio  Africanus  founded  a colony  at  Italica  on  the 
Bsetis.  The  Trajani  were  men  of  some  note  in  the  province, 
which  gave  birth  to  many  personages  distinguished  after- 
wards at  Rome.  Trajanus,  the  father  of  the  emperor,  and 
Silius  Italicus,  the  consul  and  poet,  were  natives  of  the  same 
colony,  and  nearly  contemporary  in  age;  but  their  career 
was  different,  for  while  Silius,  a man  of  fortune  and  literary 
acquirements,  enjoyed  fame  and  fashion  in  the  capital,  his 
fellow-citizen  devoted  himself  to  a career  of  arms,  won  victo- 
ries over  the  Parthians  and  the  Jews,  gained  the  triumphal 
ornaments,  and  governed  provinces.  Trajanus  had  com- 
manded the  Tenth  legion  at  the  bloody  storming  of  Joppa; 1 
he  had  proved  himself  an  adroit  courtier  as  well  as  a gallant 
officer ; and  having  advanced  in  due  time  to  the  consulship, 
reached  the  summit  of  official  distinction  as  proconsul  of 
Asia.  After  this  we  hear  no  more  of  him ; but  there  seems 
reason  to  believe  that  he  survived  his  son’s  elevation  to  power, 
and  received  from  him  after  death  the  honours  of  apotheosis.3 

perhaps  a by-name  of  his  family  from  the  Turdetanian  fashion  of  wearing  their 
hair  long.  The  name  is  not  recognized  on  the  monuments.  We  have  no  com- 
plete biography  of  Trajan.  Notices  of  his  birth  and  early  career  are  found  in 
Eutropius  and  Aurelius  Victor,  Ctes.  13.,  Epit.  13.  Dion  compressed  the  reigns 
of  Nerva  and  Trajan  into  a single  book,  of  which  we  possess  an  imperfect  and 
confused  epitome.  Pliny,  in  his  Letters  and  Panegyric , is  our  most  valuable 
authority.  These  and  other  materials  had  long  since  been  put  together  by 
Tillemont  in  the  History  of  the  Emperors,  which  was  long  generally  acknowl- 
edged as  the  best  compilation  that  could  be  made.  But  recently  the  elaborate 
work  of  Francke,  Geschichte  Trajans,  has  supplied  many  deficiencies  in  Tille- 
mont,  and  the  chronology  of  the  latter  year  of  this  reign  has  been  put  on  a 
more  satisfactory  footing. 

1 Joseph.,  Bell.Jud.  iii.  11. 

a Pliny  in  his  Panegyric  (a.  p.  100)  speaks  of  Trajan  the  father  as  ther 


A.U.  851.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


173 


Trajan,  the  son,  was  horn,  according  to  the  most  probable 
statement,  towards  the  end  of  the  year  53,  and,  accordingly, 
on  his  accession  to  the  undivided  sovereignty,  had 

° Early  career  o 

reached  the  middle  of  his  forty-fifth  year.1  From  the  emperor 

J J Trajan. 

early  youth  he  had  been  trained  in  the  camp  by 
his  father’s  side,  and  had  gained  the  love  and  confidence  of 
the  legions,  among  which  he  had  waged  the  border  warfare 
of  the  empire.  He  seems  to  have  risen  through  the  various 
grades  of  the  service,  and  had  held  the  post  of  military  trib" 
une  for  ten  years,  in  which  he  had  become  familiar  with  all 
the  methods  and  resources  of  Roman  warfare,  and  had  learnt 
the  names  of  officers  and  soldiers  in  many  distant  garrisons, 
whose  bravery  and  whose  wounds  he  had  personally  wit- 
nessed.2 He  had  shown  talents  for  administration,  as  well 
as  for  war,  and  to  his  personal  merits  alone  must  he  have 
owed  his  periodical  recall  from  the  camp  to  occupy  the  chief 
places  in  the  civil  government.  It  may  be  presumed  that  an 
officer  who  was  deemed  qualified  to  become  praetor  and  con- 
sul, had  enjoyed  the  ordinary  advantages  of  training  in  rhet- 
oric and  literature;  but  Trajan’s  attainments  in  learning 
were  slender,  and  modesty  or  discretion  led  him  to  conceal 
deficiencies  rather  than  affect  accomplishments  he  did  not 
possess.3  His  elevation  to  the  consulship,  which  occurred  in 

dead,  but  not  yet  deified  ; the  interval,  we  may  suppose,  would  not  be  long. 
That  he  was  actually  “ consecrated  ” appears  from  a medal  inscribed : “ Divi 
Nerva  et  Trajanus  pater.” 

1 The  statements  of  Eutropius,  Yictor,  and  Eusebius  vary  by  one  or  more 
years.  Dion,  who  specifies  the  length  of  his  reign  and  day  of  his  death,  makes 
him  41  at  his  accession.  But  as  Pliny  assures  us  that  he  served  in  his  father’s 
Parthian  campaign,  which  can  hardly  be  placed  later  than  67,  he  must  have 
been  then  at  least  14  years  of  age,  and,  therefore,  the  latest  date  we  can 
assign  to  his  birth  would  be  53,  that  is,  44  years  before  his  adoption. 

2 Plin.  Parley . 15. 

3 Yictor,  F/pit.  13. : “ quum  ipse  pare®  esset  scienti®,  moderateque  elo» 
quens.”  Dion,  lxviii.  7. : mudeiac  pb>  yap  anpi/Sovg,  bar;  kv  Xdyocg,  ov  perelxe- 
Comp.  Julian,  Ccescir.  of  Trajan : 6 tie  naiirep  SwapevoQ  teyeiv  vtto  padvpiag 
....  ipdeyybfievoc  paPkov  ^ ?Ayav.  An  epigram  in  the  Anthologia  is  ascribed 
to  Trajan,  and  he  composed  commentaries  on  his  Wars  in  Dacia.  See  Reimar 
on  Dion,  1.  c.  The  story  that  he  was  instructed  by  Plutarch  may  be  rejected 


174 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  1).  98. 


91,  may  have  seemed  even  beyond  Ms  deserts,  and  hence  tbe 
story  which  obtained  currency,  at  least  at  a later  period,  that 
it  was  attended  with  omens  portending  his  own  accession  to 
the  purple,  and  at  the  same  time  the  sudden  downfall  of  his 
colleague  Glabrio.1  When  his  term  of  office  expired,  Trajan 
succeeded  to  a government  in  Spain,  which  he  afterwards 
exchanged  for  a command  in  the  lower  Germany.  The 
tribes  beyond  the  Rhine  had  been  exasperated  rather  than 
repressed  by  the  idle  campaigns  of  Domitian,  and  required 
for  then-  control  a firm  hand  and  an  experienced  eye.  Trajan, 
His  discreet  while  faithful  to  his  imperator,  had  a discreet  re- 
™ m manlier  on  gai'd  to  his  own  interests  also.  He  plunged  into 
the  Ehme.  n0  aggressive  warfare,  but  was  satisfied  Avith  the 
fame  of  vigilance  and  prudence  for  preserving  peace  on  the 
frontiers.”  By  such  self-restraint  he  escaped,  perhaps,  the 
mortification  of  an  Agricola,  retained  his  post  throughout  the 
latter  years  of  his  jealous  master,  and  reaped  the  fruits  of  his 
temperate  reserve,  when  the  prince  of  the  senate  required 
the  protection  of  his  best  officer  against  his  own  mutinous 
guards. 

When,  indeed,  Nerva  was  reduced  to  seek  this  protection, 
his  choice  would  necessarily  lie  between  the  commanders  of 
the  two  great  European  divisions  of  the  Roman 

Accession  of  ^ . 

Trajan  to  the  forces,  the  prefect  of  the  Rhenish,  and  the  prefect 
of  the  Danubian  legions ; for  the  chief  of  the 
army  of  Syria  lay  at  too  great  a distance  to  compete,  at  least 
at  the  moment,  with  either  of  these  formidable  champions. 
But  of  the  military  triumvirate  in  whose  hands  the  fate  of 
Rome  now  actually  resided,  the  commander  on  the  Rhine  had 
generally  the  most  decisive  influence ; and  it  was  fortunate 
for  the  feeble  emperor  that  he  possessed  at  this  juncture  in 
his  lieutenant  Trajan  the  most  devoted  as  Avell  as  the  bravest 
of  ] >artisans.  The  adoption  of  such  a colleague  silenced  dig" 
affection;  the  few  remaining  months  of  Nerva’s  reign  were 

as  a fiction,  founded,  perhaps,  on  the  favour  he  undoubtedly  showed  to  that 
philosopher. 

1 Suet.  Domii  12. 


3 Plin.  Paneff.  14. 


X.  D.  851.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


175 


passed  in  tranquillity  and  honour ; and  even  the  praetorians 
acquiesced  without  a murmur  in  the  accession  of  the  valiant 
captain  on  the  Rhine. 

The  messengers  of  the  senate,  charged  with  the  vows  of 
all  the  citizens,  found  Trajan  among  his  soldiers  at  Cologne, 
and  there  announced  to  him  his  succession.1  He 

Trajan  gives 

had  already  been  nominated  to  his  second  con-  pledges  for 

...  . . moderation. 

sulship ; he  now  assumed  all  the  great  functions 
of  state  which  together  constituted  the  imperial  power.  He 
replied  with  a letter  to  the  senate,  in  which  he  promised, 
after  his  father’s  example,  that  no  magnate  of  their  order 
should  suffer  capitally  during  his  reign ; and  this  formal  an- 
nouncement was  accepted  as  a pledge  of  constitutional  gov- 
ernment. Nor  was  it  an  empty  compliment.  It  implied  a 
promise  to  conduct  affairs  in  a spirit  of  moderation  ; not  to 
pamper  the  soldiers  or  the  people ; not  to  scatter  the  public 
treasures  in  needless  debauchery ; not  to  create  a dire  neces- 
sity for  rapine,  which  must  mark  for  plunder  and  slaughter 
the  wealthiest  and  noblest  of  the  citizens.  So  perfect  was 
the  content  of  all  classes,  so  easily  did  the  wheels  of  admin- 
istration move  in  the  capital,  that  the  new  emperor  was  not 
required  even  to  hasten  to  Rome,  and  assume  the  reins  in 
person.  He  had  conceived  a system  of  government  different 
from  that  of  any  of  his  predecessors.  Though  not  wanting 
in  ability  for  the  direction  of  civil  affairs,  his  experience  and 
his  tastes  were  chiefly  military.  Long  accustomed  to  the 
life  of  the  camps,  he  had  been  debarred  by  his  master’s  jeal- 
ousy from  the  full  exercise  of  his  genius  for  war ; but  he  had 
laboured  in  restoring  the  discipline  of  the  legions,  and  had 
attached  them  personally  to  him,  even  while  forced  to  restrain 
their  ardour  for  more  active  employment.  lie  flattered  him- 
self that  he  had  prepared  a career  of  victory  by  the  perfection 
to  which  he  had  brought  the  instrument  which  was  to  ac- 
complish it.  Trajan  completed  the  fortification  of  the  Rhen- 
ish frontier  by  the  establishment  of  colonies  and  military 

1 Victor,  Epil.  13.  : “ Hie  imperium  apud  Agrippinam  nobilem  Gallia 
coloniam  accepit." 


176 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  98. 


posts.  Nigh  to  the  ruined  leaguer  of  Castra  Vetera  he 
planted  the  station  which  bore  for  centuries  the  name  of  Ulpia 

Traiana.  He  threw  a bridge  across  the  Rhine  at 

Trajan’s  bridge  J n ° . 

across  the  Mainz,  and  settled  a colony  ten  miles  beyond  the 

Rhine  atMainz.  . . 17  , 

river,  possibly  at  Hochst,  and  another  further 
south,  at  the  medicinal  springs  of  Baden  Baden.1 2  He  repair* 
ed  and  strengthened  the  lines  commenced  by  Drusus,  and  ex- 
tended by  Tiberius,  which  ran  from  a point  nearly  opposite 
to  Bonn,  in  an  oblique  direction,  across  the  Taunus  district ; 
and  he  contemplated  carrying  a continuous  fosse  and  rampart 
to  the  bank  of  the  Danube.  The  upper  waters  of  the  two 
great  rivers  of  western  Europe  approach  very  near  to  each 
other  in  the  Black  F orest,  where  the  Danube  has  its  source  ; 
but  from  thence  they  rapidly  diverge  to  the  north  and  east 
respectively.  The  wedge  of  land  between  them  had,  from 
the  time  of  Caasar’s  contest  with  the  Suevi,  been  abandoned 
for  the  most  part  by  the  natives  to  a slender  but  constant 
immigration  of  Romanized  Gauls ; and  these  new  occupants 
gladly  compounded  for  the  protection  or  countenance  of  the 
empire  by  a tribute,  to  which  was  given  the  name  of  tenths.8 
The  A<ri  De-  The  tract  thus  held  received  the  title  of  the  Agri 
cumates.  Decumates,  or  Tithe-land ; but  we  have  no  record 
of  it  in  history  till  we  hear  of  the  undertaking  of  Trajan,  who 
is  supposed  to  have  commenced  at  least  the  long  fortified 
lines  by  which  it  was  eventually  protected  throughout.3 * * * *  Nor 


1 The  “munimentum  Trajani”  (Ammian.  Marcell.  xvii.  1.),  about  ten  miles 
from  Moguntiacum,  seems  to  correspond  with  the  position  of  Hochst.  Mannert. 
Geoff,  iii.  463.  Baden  Baden  was  Aquae,  or  Aurelia  Aquensis. 

2 Tac.  Germ.  29. : “ levissimus  quisque  Gallorum  et  inopia  audax  dubia 
possessionis  solum  occupavere.  Mox  limite  acto  promotisque  prsesidiis,  sinus 
Imperii  et  pars  provincise  habentur.”  The  limes  here  is  not  a boundary  line, 
but  a road  from  the  centre  for  the  rapid  transmission  of  troops  to  the  frontier. 

3 One  section  of  this  fortification  (from  the  Westerwald  across  the  Main  to 

the  Altmiihl,  Niebuhr,  Zed.  on  Rom.  Hist.  ii.  252.)  is  ascribed,  according  to 

some  critics,  by  Frontinus  to  Domitian:  Stratagem,  i.  3.  10.:  “Imperatoi 

Caesar  Domitianus  Aug.  quum  Germani  more  suo  e saltibus  et  obscuris  latebris 

subinde  impugnarent  nostros,  tutumque  regressum  in  profunda  sylvarum  habe- 

rent,  limitibus  per  centum  viginti  millia  passuum  actis,  non  mutavit  tantum 


A.  IT.  851. J 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


Ill 


can  we  determine  how  far  this  emperor  proceed- 

. .....  Commence- 

ed  m the  accomplishment  of  this  design,  which  ment  of  a n» 

x part  from  the 

was  prosecuted  by  his  next  successor,  and  com-  Rhine  to  the 
pleted  perhaps,  or  restored  and  strengthened,  by 
Probus,  a century  and  a half  later.  Of  this  great  work, — 
the  greatness  of  which  lay,  however,  in  the  extent  and  vig- 
our of  the  design  rather  than  in  the  massiveness  of  its  exe- 
cution,— sufficient  vestiges  even  now  remain  to  trace  it  from 
river  to  river ; but  these  vestiges  consist  at  most  of  faint 
marks  of  a mound  and  ditch,  which  seem  to  have  been 
strengthened  by  a palisade,  with  watchtowers  at  intervals,  but 
to  have  been  nowhere  combined  with  a wall  of  masonry.1 
Nor,  if  Trajan  commenced  these  works,  can  the  date  of  his 
share  in  them  be  ascertained  ; as,  however,  he  remained  but 
one  year  on  the  Rhenish  frontier  after  his  accession,  and 
never  returned  to  it,  we  may  conclude  that  his  stations  and 
colonies,  and  military  lines,  were  planned,  at  least,  and  under- 
taken while  he  was  yet  a subject. 

Having  thus  completed  his  arrangements  in  this  quarter, 
Trajan  at  last  bent  his  steps  homeward,  and  made  his  entry 
into  the  city  in  the  year  99.  He  had  received  Trfljan  enter8 
the  Tribunitian  power  at  the  time  of  his  adop-  Iiome> A- D-  "■ 
tion ; the  title  also  of  Germanicus,  together  with  the  name 
of  his  father  1ST erva,  had  been  bestowed  on  him  on  the  same 
occasion.  The  consulship,  with  which  he  had  been  a second 
time  invested  while  the  late  emperor  was  still  living,  he  de- 
clined to  claim  for  the  ensuing  year,  being  himself  absent 
from  the  city,  from  respect,  perhaps,  to  the  ancient  usage ; 
nor  would  he  allow  the  senate  to  salute  him  as  Father  of  his 

Btatum  belli,  sed  subjecit  ditioni  suae  hostes  quorum  refugia  nudaverat.”  But 
this  I rather  interpret  of  a road  driven  into  the  heart  of  a country,  than  of  a 
limitary  rampart.  So  Frontinus  again,  i.  5.  10. : “ ab  altera  parte  limitem 
agere  coepit,  tanquam  per  eum  erupturus.” 

1 The  line  of  “ Trajan’s  wall”  has  been  carefully  examined  within  the  last 
few  years  by  Mr.  Yates,  whose  interesting  account  of  it  I have  read,  if  I am 
not  mistaken,  in  a recent  volume  of  Transactions  of  the  Archaeological 
Institute. 


178 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  99 


country  till  he  had  presented  himself  to  the  citizens,  and 
earned  the  endearing  appellation  by  his  courtesy  and  modera- 
tion.1 * * * His  demeanour  as  well  as  his  actions  were  such  as 
befitted  the  true  patriot  and  citizen,  and  excited  accordingly 
the  warmest  enthusiasm.  Throughout  his  progress  from 
Germany  he  abstained  from  the  demands  and  exactions 
usually  made  even  on  subjects  and  provincials.  His  entry 
into  Rome  was  a moral  triumph.  Martial,  in  a few  graphic 
touches,  brings  vividly  before  us  the  man,  the  place,  and  the 
people.5  Pliny  exerts  himself  to  describe  more  elaborately 
the  extreme  condescension  and  affability  of  the  prince,  who 
deigned  to  approach  the  home  of  law  and  freedom  on  foot, 
unattended  by  guards,  distinguished  only  by  the  eminence 
of  his  stature,  and  the  dignity  of  his  bearing ; allowing  the 
citizens  of  all  grades  to  throng  about  him;  admitting  the 
greetings  of  the  senators  on  his  return  as  emperor,  with  the 
same  graciousness  with  which  he  had  accepted  them  when 
he  went  forth  as  a fellow-subject;  addressing  even  the  knights 
by  name;  paying  his  vows  to  his  country’s  gods  in  the  Capi- 
tol, and  entering  the  palace  of  the  Caesars  as  the  modest 

1 Pliny,  Paneg.  20.,  declares,  'with  headlong  adulation,  that  every  emperor 

before  Trajan  had  assumed  this  title  without  hesitation  on  the  day  of  his 

accession.  We  know,  however,  that  Augustus  long  deferred  it;  so  did  Tiberius 

(Tac.  Ann.  i.  72.,  Suet.  Tib.  67.)  and  Yespasian  (Suet.  Vcsp.  12.).  Capitolinus, 
indeed,  asserts  that  Pertinax,  nearly  a century  later,  was  the  first  of  the  empe- 
rors who  assumed  it  at  once. 

5 Martial,  x.  6. : 

“ Felices  quibus  urna  dedit  spectare  coruscum 
Solibus  Arctois  sideribusque  ducem,”  &c. 

But  this  is  in  anticipation  of  the  hero’s  arrival,  for  which  the  poet  proceeds 
to  offer  his  vows  in  the  next  epigram : “ Nympharum  pater  amniumque  Rhene 
....  Trajanum  populis  suis  et  Urbi,  Tibris  te  dominus  rogat,  remittas.” 

Compare  the  verses  of  Claudian  on  Stilicho’s  entry  into  Rome,  xxii.  397, 
foil.  The  reader  should  be  warned  against  the  confusion  of  dates  in  the 
arrangement  of  Martial’s  pieces.  In  book  x.  epigrams  6,  7.,  and  probably  71., 
refer  to  Trajan : but  xi.  4,  5.,  though  inscribed  in  the  edition  to  Nerva  Traja- 
nus,  undoubtedly  to  Nerva.  In  book  xii.  epigram  6.  refers  to  the  earlier,  and 
8.  to  the  later  emperor. 


A.  U.  852.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


179 

owner  of  a private  mansion.1  Hor  did  Trajan  stand  alone  in 
this  exhibition  of  patriotic  decorum.  His  wife,  Plotina,  bore 
herself  as  the  spouse  of  a simple  senator ; and  as  Magnanimity 
she  mounted  the  stair  of  the  imperial  residence,  wUe!°nd  jjar- 
turned  towards  the  multitude,  and  declared  that  Clana’ hls slster- 
she  was  about  to  enter  it  with  the  same  equanimity  with 
which  sbte  should  wish  hereafter,  if  fate  so  required,  to  aban- 
don it.2  Her  behaviour  throughout  her  husband’s  career 
corresponded  with  this  commencement.  ISTor  less  magnani- 
mous was  the  conduct  of  Trajan’s  sister,  Marciana,  who  in- 
habited the  palace  in  perfect  harmony  with  the  empress,  and 
assisted  her  in  maintaining  its  august  etiquette.  Trajan 
himself  renewed  by  word  of  mouth  the  oath  he  had  before 
made  in  writing,  that  he  would  never  harm  the  person  of  a 
senator,  an  oath  which  he  continued  faithfully  to  respect. 
But  he  was  not  unmindful  of  his  parent’s  adjuration,  and 
sought  out  for  condign  punishment  the  mutineers  who  had 
trampled  on  Herva’s  weakness.  Such  was  his  confidence  in 
his  authority  over  the  soldiers,  that  he  ventured  to  reduce 
the  customary  donative  to  one-half  the  amount  to  which  his 
predecessors  had  raised  it.  Hot  a murmur  was  heard  even 
in  the  camp  of  the  praetorians ; and  when  he  handed  to  the 
prefect  the  poniard  which  was  the  symbol  of  his  office,  he 
could  boldly  say,  Use  this  for  me , if  I do  well • if  ill,  against 
me.s  We  have  seen  that  the  lenient  or  feeble  Herva,  though 
he  revived  the  edicts  of  Titus  against  the  delators,  had  failed 
to  satisfy  the  fury  of  his  nobles  in  punishing  them.  Trajan 
had  no  such  weakness,  and  showed  no  such  moderation. 
Giving  the  rein  at  last  to  the  passions  of  the  sufferers,  he 

1 Pliny,  Paneg.  22,  foil. : “ qui  dies  ille  quo  exspectatus  desideratusque 

urbem  ingressus  es  ? . . . . gratum  erat  cunctis  quod  senatum  oseulo  exciperes, 
ut  dimissus  oseulo  fueras,  &c quod  latus  tuum  crederes  omnibus,”  &c. 

2 Dion,  Ixviii.  5. 

s Dion,  Ixviii.  16. : Victor,  Ctes.  13.  This  famous  saying  was  remembered 
in  the  last  decline  of  Rome,  and  alluded  to  by  Sidonius  Apollinaris,  Carm.  5. : 
“ Vix  habuit  mores  similes  cui,  teste  Senatu, 

In  se  etiam  tractum  commiserat  Ulpius  ensem.” 


180 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  100. 


executed  what,  according  to  Pliny’s  account,  we  might  call  a 
razzia  upon  the  remnant  of  the  culprits.  Pliny  describes  the 
extraordinary  spectacle  of  a number  of  these  people  dragged 
in  chains  through  the  circus  before  the  assembled  citizens, 
with  every  circumstance  of  deliberate  insult ; and  when  the 
most  obnoxious  had  been  selected  for  capital  punishment,  the 
rest  were  shipped  for  exile  beyond  sea,  on  the  craziest  barks 
in  the  stormiest  weather.1 

The  famous  Panegyric , an  impressive  monument  of  this 
illustrious  reign,  which  seems  to  have  been  delivered  by 
Trajan  receives  Bl'my,  as  consul,  on  the  third  anniversary  of  Tra- 
timus°°  °f  0l>'  jan’s  Tribunitian  power,  not  only  celebrates  such 
a d 100  instances  of  his  magnanimity  and  justice,  but 

a.  it.  853.  enumerates  also  many  wise  and  beneficent  meas- 

ures he  had  already  carried  into  effect.  Our  review  of  these 
may  be  deferred  till  we  can  comprise  the  whole  course  of  his 
civil  administration,  which  was  soon  interrupted  by  a long 
interval  of  warlike  operations.  So  favourable,  however,  was 
the  impression  Trajan  had  made  during  his  sojourn  in  the 
city,  that  the  senate  decreed  him,  in  addition  to  the  other 
titles  usually  borne  by  the  emperors,  the  transcendent  appel- 
lation of  Optimus,  or  the  Best.2  ISTor  was  this  a merely  for- 
mal compliment.  While  the  titles  of  Csesar  and  Augustus, 
of  Magnus  and  Germanicus,  were  suffered  to  descend  from 
sire  to  son,  no  other  emperor  was  honoured  with  the  special 
appellation  of  Optimus  ; though  it  is  said  to  have  been  usual, 

1 “Congesti  sunt  in  navigia  raptim  conquisita,  ac  tempestatibus  dediti. 
Abirent,  fugerent  yastatas  delationibus  terras,  ac  si  quem  fluctus  ac  procell® 
scopulis  reservassent,  hie  nuda  saxa  et  inhospitale  litus  incoleret.”  Paneg.  34. 
Similar  severities  had  been  used  before  by  Titus  (Suet.  Tit.  8.,  see  above),  but 
the  wrongs  sustained  had  been  less,  and  they  had  not  perhaps  been  celebrated 
i>  ith  such  passionate  exultation. 

2 Pliny,  Paneg.  2.  88.  It  has  been  remarked,  indeed,  that  the  title  “ Opti- 
mus ” does  not  appear  on  Trajan’s  coins  before  his  eleventh  year,  and  we  must 
suppose  that,  though  formally  assigned  him  by  the  senate,  he  forebore  for  a 
time  to  assume  it.  Dion  (Ixviii.  23.)  refers  this  title  to  a still  later  date.  He 
adds  that  Trajan  was  more  proud  of  it  than  of  any  other,  as  a compliment  to 
his  character  rather  than  to  his  exploits. 


A.  U.  853.  J 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


181 


In  later  times,  for  the  senate,  on  the  accession  of  each  new 
chief  of  the  republic,  to  exclaim,  as  the  highest  token  of  its 
admiration,  that  he  was  more  fortunate  than  Augustus,  and 
better  than  Trajan.1 

But  the  flattery  of  the  senate,  even  in  the  polished  phrases 
of  Pliny,  the  most  accomplished  of  his  order,  must  have  been 
irksome  to  a man  of  Trajan’s  plain  sense.  We  Trajan  marches 
can  well  believe  that  he  soon  bee'an  to  fret  under  the  Da' 

the  restraints  of  deference  to  a society  by  which  , D lftl 

he  must  have  been  frequently  mortified,  and  A- u- 854 
longed  to  fling  himself  into  the  stir  and  movement  of  the 
military  career.  Confined  for  many  years  within  the  de- 
fences of  the  camp,  he  had  there  assiduously  prepared  all  the 
machinery  of  aggressive  warfare,  and  he  was  now  anxious  to 
go  and  prove  it.  In  the  fourth  year  of  his  reign  he  quitted 
the  city  to  undertake  war  on  a large  scale,  and  with  great 
ends  in  view,  against  the  long-formidable  Dacians.2  The 
motives  ascribed  to  him  are,  indignation  at  the  successes 
which  these  barbarians  could  boast  in  their  previous  conflicts 
with  the  empire,  and  disgust  at  the  payment  of  an  annual 
tribute  to  which  Domitian  is  said  to  have  consented.  But 
these,  perhaps,  were  mere  pretences.  Confident  in  the  per- 
fection of  the  instrument  he  now  wielded,  he  trusted  by  its 
means  to  emulate  the  glories  of  a Julius  or  an  Alexander. 
The  legions  of  the  Rhine  also,  however  exact  their  discipline, 
were  doubtless  burning  for  employment ; those  on  the  Ister 
were  turbulent  as  well  as  impatient.  The  founder  of  a new 
dynasty  could  hardly  depend  on  their  fidelity  without  hu- 
mouring their  martial  instincts.  We  must  consider,  too,  that 


Eutrop.  viii.  5. : “ hujus  tantum  memorise  delatum  est,  ut  usque  ad  nos- 
tram  setatem  non  aliter  in  Senatu  principibus  acclamaretur,  quam,  felicior 
Augusto  melior  Trajano ! ” One  of  Trajan’s  most  popular  sayings  is  also  re- 
corded by  this  writer : “ talem  se  imperatorem  esse  privatis,  quales  esse  eibi 
imperatores  privatus  optasset.” 

5 Clinton,  Fast.  Rom.  The  Panegyric  of  Pliny  was  delivered  in  the  autumn 
preceding,  when  Trajan  was  designated  consul  for  the  fourth  time.  This  con- 
Bulship  he  held  in  101. 


182 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.D.  101 


the  vast  and  increasing  expenses  of  a military  government 
required  to  he  maintained  by  extraordinary  means,  and  Tra- 
jan may  have  launched  himself  against  the  foe  beyond  the 
frontier  to  obviate  the  necessity  of  levying  fresh  contributions 
on  his  own  subjects.  He  meant  that  his  wars  should  be  self- 
supporting ; that  their  expenses  should  be  defrayed  by  the 
conquered  enemy,  and  the  cupidity  of  the  soldiers  satisfied 
with  the  plunder  of  foreigners.  The  Dacians,  though  in 
name  barbarians,  seem  to  have  been  actually  possessors  of 
considerable  wealth,  and  to  have  attained  to  a certain  degree 
of  social  refinement.  They  were  a branch  of  the  Get®,  a 
people  of  whom  it  was  remarked  that  they  stood  nearest  to 
the  Greeks  in  their  natural  aptitude  for  civilization;1  and 
besides  the  stores  they  accumulated  in  their  repeated  inroads 
oil  the  Greek  and  Roman  settlements,  their  country  abounded 
in  mines  of  gold  and  silver,  as  well  as  of  iron.  Such  were 
the  glittering  spoils  which  tempted  the  long-restrained  ardour 
of  the  legionaries,  even  more  than  their  fertile  plains  and 
illimitable  pastures. 

The  Get®  and  the  Thracians,  of  cognate  origin,  occupied 
the  region  of  Bulgaria  and  Roumelia,  and,  according  to  tra- 
dition, the  Dacians  were  an  off-shoot  from  these 

Geographical  . 

position  of  the  nations,  which  crossed  the  ister,  overran  the 
Dacians 

Banat,  Wallachia  and  Moldavia,  and  finally  fixed 
its  strongholds  in  the  mountainous  district  of  Transylvania. 
In  the  second  century  they  may  be  considered  as  occupying 
the  broad  block  of  land  bounded  by  the  Theiss, 

Their  pre-  . ** 

dntory  incur-  the  Carpathians,  the  lower  Danube  or  Ister,  and 
the  Pruth.  In  the  centre  of  this  region  rose  the 
great  mountainous  tract  in  which  the  Maros  takes  its  rise, 

1 Justin,  xxxii.  3. : “ Daci  quoque  soboles  Getarum  sunt.”  Dion,  Ixvii.  6. : 
Aa/cotf  de  aiiroiig  rcpoaayopebo],  tioTrep  ttov  nal  avrol  iavrovg  nal  ol  ' P apaloi 
u<pac  bvopa^ovotv  ovk  ayvoiov  bn  ' 'EXTikyvov  rivet;  Tkrag  aiirovg  Ikyovcnv,  elf 
opdiog  elre  not  py  \eyovreg.  The  patriotic  boasts  of  Jomandes  (de  Reb.  Get, 
i.  6.)  leant  probably  on  some  foreign  authority : “ unde  et  pasne  omnibus  bar- 
baris  Gothi  sapientiores  semper  exstiterunt,  Grmcisque  pfene  consimiles.”  See 
Franclre,  Gescli.  Trajans , p.  71.  Gregorovius,  Gescliichte  der  Stadt  Rom.  i.  452, 


A D.  854.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


183 


and  the  basin  of  this  river,  almost  inclosed  by  a circumval- 
lation  of  rugged  declivities,  contained,  the  chief  cities  of  the 
Dacian  people.  Here  was  the  residence  of  their  king,  here 
they  stored  their  plunder  ; hither,  when  pressed  by  an  invad- 
ing foe,  they  retreated,  and  generally  found  themselves  se- 
cure. For  the  marshes  of  the  lower  Theiss  and  Maros  effect- 
ually protected  them  on  the  west,  and  the  three  passes  of 
the  Iron  Gate,  the  Yolcan,  and  the  Rothenthurm,  were  easily 
defensible  against  an  enemy  from  the  south.1  Hence  they 
issued  in  mid-winter,  when  the  deep  alluvial  soil  of  the 
Danubian  valley  was  indurated  by  frost,  and  the  great  river 
itself  congealed,  or  choked  with  ice,  and  crossing  the  stream 
at  a season  when  the  Romans  had  desisted  from  their  sum- 
mer expeditions,  and  quietly  piled  their  arms,  carried  fire  and 
sword  into  the  defenceless  provinces.2  On  the  return  of  fine 
weather,  the  Romans  armed  again,  and  defied  the  barbarians, 
who  indeed  were  unable  to  stem  the  current  of  the  Danube : 
but  if  they  sought  to  make  reprisals,  it  was  a long  and  dif- 
ficult task  even  for  Roman  engineers  to  bridge  a stream  so 
mighty,  and  the  Dacians  had  at  least  ample  time  to  betake 
themselves  to  their  mountains.  The  attempts  of  Domitian’s 
generals  to  penetrate  into  the  strongholds  of  Decebalus  had 
been  always  frustrated,  and  sometimes  with  loss  and  disgrace. 
To  purchase  peace  by  tribute,  under  whatever  name  or  colour, 
was  a dishonourable  and  indeed  a precarious  resource.  The 
time  was  come  when  Rome,  with  a well-appointed  army,  and 
under  a military  ruler,  could,  by  one  sustained  effort,  termin- 

1 This  configuration  of  the  Dacian  territory  seems  to  explain  the  Roman 
habit  of  describing  the  stronghold  of  the  nation  as  “ their  mountain.”  Stat. 
Sylv.  iii.  3.  169. : “ Quseque  suum  Dacis  donat  dementia  montem  ; ” LI.  80. : 
“ tu  tardum  in  fcedera  montem  Longo  Marte  domas.”  Theb.  i.  20. : “ Et  con- 
juiato  dejectos  vertice  Dacos.” 

2 The  “ conjuratus  Ister  ” of  Virgil  {Georg,  ii.  49T.)  is  explained  by  tho 
Scholiast  after  a writer  named  Aufidius  Modestus,  from  the  oustom  of  the  Da- 
cians to  draw  water  from  the  Danube,  when  about  to  undertake  an  expedition, 
and  swear  by  it  not  to  return  till  they  had  conquered.  Ukert,  Geogr.  iii.  2. 

p.  608 


184 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  101. 


ate  this  state  of  suspense  and  suffering.  The  Roman  Peace 
demanded  War  in  earnest. 

Seven  legions  may  he  enumerated,  which,  together  with 

their  auxiliaries,  with  ten  cohorts  of  praetorians,  and  a force 

firgt  of  Batavian  cavalry,  took  part  in  the  campaigns 

cian  campaign,  of  Trajan  against  the  Dacians,  though  we  cannot 

a.  n.  101.  safely  affirm  that  the  whole  of  this  mighty  arma- 
A.u.  854.  J n & J , . 

ment  was  employed  together  m any  one  of  his 
expeditions.1  Drawn  in  part  from  the  stations  permanently 
located  on  the  Moesian  frontier,  in  part  from  the  military 
reserves  in  Illyricum  and  Dalmatia,  hi  part  also  from  the 
great  army  established  on  the  Rhine,  a force  of  sixty  or  per- 
haps eighty  thousand  veterans  was  mustered  on  the  hanks  of 
Trajan  <3e-  the  Danube  and  the  Save.  Segestica,  the  mod- 
Savtf  an!i.e  ern  Sissck,  was  the  spot  selected  by  Trajan  for 
acrossSthed§e3  the  base  of  his  operations.  From  this  place, 
Danube.  which  had  been  long  the  common  arsenal  of 


Mcesia  and  Pannonia,  he  directed  his  munitions  of  war  to  he 
floated  dmvn  the  Save  to  its  confluence  with  the  greater 
river.2 * *  At  Singidunum  he  passed  in  review  the  legions  of 
either  province,  led  his  united  forces  to  the  passage  of  the 
Morava,  and  thence  a few  miles  further  to  a post  named 
Viminaciuin,  the  modern  Kastolatz,  where  the  Danube,  flow- 
ing with  a broad  hut  tranquil  stream,  offered  facilities  for  the 
construction  of  a bridge  of  boats.  Here  commence  the  high- 
lands of  the  Danubian  valley,  the  southernmost  spurs  of  the 
Carpathians  plunging  into  the  river  and  confronting  the  no 
less  rugged  abutments  of  the  northern  spurs  of  the  Balkan. 
The  stream,  confined  for  thirty  miles  between  these  precipi- 


1 Francke  ( Gesch . Trojans,  p.  95,  foil.)  traces  all  these  legions  from  inscrip- 
tions and  other  records.  They  were  the  i.  Minervia,  the  ii.  Adjutrix,  the  iv., 
v.,  vii.,  xi.,  and  xiii. 

2 These  localities  are  thus  specified  from  conjecture,  founded  on  the  known 
direction  of  the  lines  of  road  in  these  parts,  and  the  indications  on  the  Trajan 

column,  which  represent  the  assembling  of  the  army,  its  magazines  and  en- 

campments, the  crossing  of  more  than  one  river,  and  other  details  of  its 

march.  See  the  interpretation  in  Francke’s  Gesch.  Trajans,  p.  192,  folL 


A.  U.  854.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


185 


tous  cliffs,  foams  in  a furious  torrent,  exasperated  by  the 
rocky  ledges  which  at  some  points  intercept  its  course  from 
one  bank  to  the  other.  Again  the  river  expands  and  resumes 
its  tranquil  majesty,  and  near  its  confluence  with  a little 
stream  called  now  the  Tjerna,  a second  bridge  seems  to  have 
been  also  thrown  across  it.  From  these  two  The  various 
points  the  Danube  was  henceforth  regularly  ^].and3ofh° 
crossed,  and  the  Romans  executed  roads  from  Dacia- 
both  the  one  and  the  other,  by  which  to  penetrate  into 
Dacia.  The  more  western  route  led  into  the  Banat  by  the 
valley  of  the  Theiss,  keeping  the  mountains  to  the  right ; the 
eastern  ascended  the  Tjerna,  having  the  mountains  on  the 
left,  till,  on  a sudden  change  in  their  direction,  it  was  re- 
quired to  breast  them.  Having  surmounted  the  ridge,  it 
descended  into  the  valley  of  the  Temes,  and  met  the  former 
road  near  Karansebes,  at  the  junction  of  the  Temes  and 
Bistra.  These  are  torrents  of  little  note;  but  the  gorge 
of  the  Bistra,  through  which  a way  was  afterwards  carried, 
led  to  the  pass  most  properly  designated  the  Iron  Gate,  the 
key  of  the  Maros  valley,  and  of  the  Dacian  mountain-land 
which  surrounds  it.  Trajan’s  army  crossed  the  Danube  in 
two  divisions  at  the  spots  above  indicated.  He  seems  him- 
self to  have  taken  the  western  route ; 1 but  the  two  divisions 
met,  as  was  concerted,  and  forced  the  pass  together.  The 
resistance  of  the  Dacians,  and  the  obstacles  presented  by 
nature,  were  equally  overcome.  The  Roman  armies  alighted 
in  the  heart  of  the  enemy’s  country,  and  established  them- 
selves in  the  royal  city  of  Zermizegethusa.2 

1 The  stations  on  this  route  (the  western)  are  given  in  the  Peutinger  Table, 
and,  by  a curious  chance,  a few  words  of  Trajan’s  own  commentaries  on  this 
war,  preserved  by  Priscian,  suffice  to  show  that  he  advanced  by  it.  The  fr 
ment  runs : “ inde  Berzobim,  deinde  Am,  processimus.”  Comp.  Tab.  Peuting. : 
“ Bersovia  xii. ; Ahitis  iii. ; Caput.  Bubuli  x. ; Tivisco.”  Francke,  Gesch.  Tro- 
ians, p.  106,  with  reference  to  Priscian,  lvi. ; Putsch,  And.  Gramm.  Lai.,  p, 
682. 

2 Dion,  Ixviii.  9.  “ Zermizegethusa,  i.  e.,  Zarmi-tzeket-Kusa,  mansion  cou- 

vert  de  peaux.”  Bergmann,  Les  Gctes,  p.  59. 


L 86 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.D.  102 


This  place,  which  became  the  seat  of  a Roman  colony  and 
acquired  the  name  of  Ulpia  Trajana,  can  be  clearly  identified 
Trajan  encoun-  with  the  modern  village  of  Varliely,  on  a little 
ijecebahi3.orst3  stream  called  the  Strehl,  a tributary  of  the  Maros. 
a.d  102.  Trajan  had  not  yet  penetrated  into  the  heart  of 
a.  tt.  855.  the  Dacian  stronghold,  and  the  barbarians  con- 
tinued to  defend  themselves  with  obstinacy.  Their  chief, 
•who  bore  the  name  of  Decebalus,  though  we  cannot  affirm 
that  he  was  the  same  who  twelve  years  before  had  proved  so 
formidable  to  Domitian,  met  the  new  invader  with  not  less 
valour  and  constancy.  A people  called  the  Burri,  who  are 
supposed  to  have  dwelt  about  the  sources  of  the  Theiss,  sent 
a message  to  the  imperator,  written,  it  was  said,  on  the  sur- 
face of  a large  fungus,  requiring  him  to  desist  from  his  attack 
on  their  kinsmen ; but  such  interference  was  contemptuously 
disregarded.  Trajan  brought  the  enemy  at  last  to  bay,  and 
in  a great  battle  at  a place  called  Tapte,  the  site  of  which  is 
not  determined,  routed  them  with  much  slaughter.1  The  care 
he  showed  for  his  wounded  soldiers  endeared  him  to  the 
legions,  which  now  pushed  on  with  alacrity,  and  forced  their 
way  into  the  inner  circle  of  hills  beyond  the  Maros,  in  which 
the  Dacian  chief  resided.  Here  Decebalus  confessed  himself 
worsted,  and  sued  for  peace. 

Of  the  above  details,  slender  as  they  are,  little  is  derived 
from  the  direct  records  of  history.  The  sculptures  of  Tra- 
jan’s column,  the  noblest  monument  of  Roman 

Records  of  this  " . ...  . 

campaign  pre-  warfare,  have  been  ingeniously  interpreted  into 
Trajan  column  a connected  narrative  of  events.  The  bridges  he 
constructed,  the  fortresses  he  attacked,  the  camps 
he  pitched,  the  enemies  he  routed,  are  here  indicated  in 
regular  sequence.  The  Romans  are  distinguished  by  their 

1 Dion,  lxviii.  8.  Tapse  is  the  name  of  the  spot  where  Julianus  defeated 
the  Dacians  in  the  reign  of  Domitian.  The  traditions  of  the  country,  guided 
perhaps  by  the  guesses  of  the  antiquarians,  point  to  a place  called  Crossfeld 
near  Thorda,  where  a plain  is  said  still  to  bear  the  name  of  Prat-Trajan.  This 
spot  seems  too  far  in  the  interior.  The  circumstance  of  the  modem  appella- 
tion is  of  no  real  value. 


A.  U.  855.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


187 


well-known  arms  and  ensigns.  The  captives  they  take,  the 
sacrifices  they  offer,  are  vividly  delineated.  The  Moorish 
horsemen,  on  the  one  hand,  are  designated  hy  light-clad 
warriors  riding  without  reins ; the  Rhoxolani,  on  the  other, 
by  mounted  figures  decked  in  a panoply  of  mail.  Trajan 
himself  harangues,  directs,  offers  his  mantle  to  hind  the 
wounds  of  his  soldiers,  takes  his  seat  on  the  tribunal,  or 
stalks  under  an  arch  of  triumph.  The  submission  of  Deceba- 
lus  is  represented  by  a troop  of  envoys  bearing  the  sheepskin 
cap,  which  expresses  their  rank  as  nobles,  and  prostrating 
themselves  before  the  conqueror.  The  capitulation  seems  to 
have  been  unconditional.  The  Dacians  delivered  up  their 
arms,  surrendered  the  fugitives  and  deserters,  razed  their  re- 
maining strongholds,  and  restored  the  eagle  lost  under 
Fuscus.1  Decebalus  consented  to  form  an  alliance  with  the 
Romans,  by  which  he  bound  himself  to  regard  their  friends 
and  their  enemies  as  his  own,  and  to  abstain  from  enrolling 
any  Roman  subject  in  his  armies;  for  many  such,  it  seems, 
he  had  entertained  in  his  service.  He  yielded  possession  to 
the  victors  of  the  places  they  had  taken  by  arms.  Finally, 
he  came  in  person,  and  paid  homage  to  the  emperor.  The 
terms  thus  exacted  in  the  field  were  ratified  in  due  form  in 
the  senate-house,  and  Trajan,  leaving  an  army  of  occupation 
at  Zermizegethusa,  and  fortifying  various  posts  of  importance, 
quitted  the  conquered  territory  and  again  presented  himself 
to  the  exulting  citizens.2 

The  victor’s  return  to  Rome  was  solemnized  by  the  re 
ception  of  Dacian  envoys  in  the  senate-house,  where  they  laid 
down  their  arms,  and  joining  their  hands  in  the  Trajan  reh,rns 
attitude  of  suppliants,  repeated  their  master’s  Jriumphs°nd 
promise  of  submission,  and  solicited  the  favour  A v 10g 
and  protection  of  the  empire.  Trajan  celebrated  A-u-  856- 

1 Diou,  Lxviii.  9. 

2 Erancke,  Gescli.  Trajans , p.  113,  foil.  The  Moorish  cavalry  are  supposed 
to  represent  a detachment  of  auxiliaries  accompanying  the  Roman  army,  and 
led  by  Lusius  Quietus,  a Mauretanian  officer,  of  whom  we  shall  hear  more  ia 
the  seauel. 


188 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  103. 


a triumph,  aucl  received  the  surname  of  Dacicus.  The  re- 
joicings on  this  occasion  were  accompanied  by  magnificeut 
shows  of  gladiators,  which  were  congenial  to  his  martial 
spirit ; but  we  should  less  have  expected  the  rude  warrior  to 
recall  the  dancers  to  the  theatre ; still  less  that  a personal 
liking  for  one  of  these  performers  should  have  induced  him 
to  this  unworthy  compliance.1  But  Trajan,  with  all  his 
valour,  generosity,  and  self-command,  was  coarse  both  by 
nature  and  habit,  and  his  vicious  tastes  were  not  confined  to 
excess  in  wine.2  His  self-respect  was  preserved  only  by  the 
bluntness  of  his  moral  sense ; and  so  far  it  was  fortunate  for 
mankind,  who  profited  by  the  serenity  with  which  he  could 
rise  from  indulgences  which  even  the  Romans  regarded  as 
weaknesses,  to  the  firm  and  prudent  exercise  of  his  lofty 
functions.  He  plunged  again  into  all  the  details  of  the  civil 
administration,  and  while  he  devised  wise  and  liberal  meas- 
ures, and  watched  over  their  execution,  he  attended  assidu- 
ously on  the  tribunals,  and  was  seen  dispensing  justice  in 

1 The  circumstances  of  this  triumph  are  only  known  to  us  in  the  meagre 
abridgment  of  Dion  (Ixviii.  10.).  Statius,  the  court-poet  of  an  earlier  reign, 
was  now  dead ; Pliny  was  absent,  having  just  left  Rome  for  the  government  of 
Bithynia  (a.  d.  103.  Clinton’s  Fast.  Rom.) ; and  Martial  had  recently  re- 
turned to  his  native  Bilbilis.  The  twelfth  book  of  the  Epigrams  was  sent  to 
Rome  from  Spain.  In  xii.  8.  Martial  seems  to  allude  to  the  foreign  captives  or 
envoys  who  attended  the  celebration  of  Trajan’s  triumph: 

“ Parthorum  proceres,  ducesque  Serum, 

Thraces,  Sauromatse,  Getae,  Britanni  : ” 

and  in  xii.  15.  he  celebrates  the  emperor’s  liberality  in  surrendering  to  public 
objects  the  splendid  furniture  of  the  palace  : 

“ Quicquid  Parrhasia  nitebat  aula, 

Donatum  est  oculis,  deisque  nostris.” 

s We  must  be  satisfied  with  Dion’s  apology,  Ixviii.  7. : aXX  si  giv  etc  tov- 
tuv  i)  aioxpov  fj  icaKov  iSeSpanei  f)  sTETrovdei,  impyopiav  av  elxs  • vvv  Si  tov  ts 
oivov  Siandpug  skive  Kai  vr'/<pov  i/v,  iv  ts  Toig  naiSiKoig  oiiSiva  iXvnrjae.  Tra- 
jan’s inebriety  is  noticed  by  Spartian  in  Hadr.  3.  Lamprid.  in  Alex.  Sev.  39 
Julian,  de  Ccesar.:  ovic  7/v  iijo)  tov  Svvaodai  pr/Topeveiv,  inrb  Si  rijc  <pi?ionociag 
apli'kvTspoQ  eavTov  •xoWaK.Lq  rjv.  Victor,  Cces.  13. : u vinolentiam,  quo  vitio, 
uti  Nerva  agebatur,  prudentia  molliverat,  curari  vetans  jussa  post  longiores 
epulas.” 


A.  O'.  856.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


189 


person,  day  by  day,  in  the  forum  of  Augustus,  in  the  portico 
of  Livia,  and  other  public  places.  But  these  occupations 
were  soon  interrupted  by  the  report  of  fresh  ag- 

x J . Renewed  ag- 

o-ressious  on  the  part  of  the  Dacians,  w7ho  began,  gressions  of  the 
& r , , , Dacians. 

it  seems,  as  soon  as  the  conqueror  s back  was 
turned,  to  break  the  treaty  in  many  ways,  by  collecting 
arms,  receiving  deserters,  repairing  their  strongholds,  solicit- 
ing alliances  with  neighbouring  tribes,  and  making  hostile 
incursions  into  the  territories  of  the  friends  or  clients  of  the 
empire.  They  ventured  to  cross  the  Theiss  and  attack  their 
ancient  enemies  the  lazyges,  on  whom  Trajan  had  forbidden 
them  to  make  reprisals.  Again  the  senate  declared  them 
public  enemies,  and  exhorted  the  emperor  to  muster  all  the 
forces  of  the  state,  and  reduce  them  to  complete  subjection.1 

In  the  spring  of  the  year  104,  Trajan  repaired  again  to 
his  army,  cantoned  along  the  course  of  the  lower  Danube, 
and  held  ready  to  be  concentrated  at  his  call  on  Trajan's  second 
any  point  to  which  he  chose  to  direct  it.  An  the  Da- 

unbroken  line  of  military  causeway,  stretching  cians- 
from  the  Mayn  across  the  Odenwald  and  Black  Forest  to  the 
Danube,  and  from  thence,  closely  hugging  the  right  bank  of 
the  stream,  to  the  shores  of  the  Euxine,  is  ascribed  to  the 
care  and  prudence  of  this  imperator,  and  was  doubtless  a 
work  of  many  years’  labour.2  Trajan  was  the  first  apparently 
of  the  emperors  who  recognized  the  homogeneity  of  the  bar- 
barian races  before  him,  foresaw  the  possibility  of  their  union, 
and  felt  the  importance  of  concentrating  against  them  all  the 
resources  of  the  empire.  The  facilities  afforded  by  these 
means  of  communication  enabled  him  to  pour  the  frontier 
legions  on  any  threatened  point,  and  even  to  spring  on  the 
foe  where  least  prepared  to  resist  him.  Of  this  enormous 
work  some  traces  may  here  and  there  be  discovered ; but  the 
line  is  marked  at  the  present  day  rather  by  names  of  posts 
and  colonies  founded  along  it,  than  by  actual  remains  of 

1 Dion,  lxviii.  10. 

2 Victor,  Cess.  13. : “ iter  conditnm  per  feras  gentes,  quo  facile  ah  usque  - 
Fontico  mari  in  Galliam  permeatur.” 


190 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  104. 


turf  or  stone.  At  one  spot,  however,  the  gorge,  namely,  of 
the  Danube  just  below  Orsova,  popularly  known  as  the  Iron 
Gate,  the  mark  of  Trajan’s  hand  may  he  discovered  in  a scar 
which  indents  for  some  miles  the  face  of  the  cliff,  forming  a 
terrace  about  five  feet  in  width.  We  cannot  believe  that  the 
way  was  actually  so  narrow,  hut  additional  width  may  have 
been  gained  by  a wooden  gallery,  supported  on  a projecting 
framework.1  The  Roman  legionary  worked  well  with  spade 
and  pickaxe;  nor,  as  may  he  seen  on  the  Trajan  column,  was 
he  less  familiar  with  the  use  of  the  carpenter’s  tools;  and  the 
forests  of  Central  Europe  supplied  him  with  abundant  ma- 
terials for  the  bridges,  the  palisades,  the  totvers,  and  the 
roadways  required  for  military  purposes.  The  road  which 
thus  threaded  the  defile  of  the  Iron  Gate  was  probably  com- 
pleted before  the  commencement  of  the  second  expedition, 
and  the  emperor  who  had  already  secured  the  Banat,  and  the 
nearest  pass  into  Transylvania,  seems  to  have  now  contem- 
plated a wider  circuit,  and  an  entrance  into  the  heart  of  the 
enemy’s  country  at  a more  distant  point.  Besides  the  Dacian 
Iron  Gate  already  mentioned,  which  we  must  be  careful  not 
to  confound  with  the  Iron  Gate  of  the  Danube,  there  were 
two  other  passes  further  eastward,  those  of  the  Yolcan  and 
the  Rothenthurm,  leading  out  of  W allachia.  The  last  and 
most  distant  of  these  defiles  is  that  through  which  the  waters 
of  the  Aluta  descend  into  the  Danube  valley ; and  an 
ancient  Roman  road  may  be  traced  to  it  from  the  bank  of 

the  Danube.  With  this  road  the  vestiges  of  an 

Remains  of  . _ . _ . . . 

bridges  at  oieii  ancient  bridge  over  the  great  river  at  Bieli  may 

and  at  Severin.  ...  ^ . /-*•  .. 

easily  he  connected ; and  at  Gieli  our  antiquaries 
were  wont  to  fix  the  spot  where  Trajan  planted  in  the  stream 
(die  vast  and  solid  pile  described  by  Dion.  But  this  opinion 

1 The  construction  of  this  road  is  described  by  Mr.  Paget  in  his  Hungary 
and  Transylvania,  ii.  123.  It  is  ascertained  to  be  the  work  of  Trajan  from 
an  inscription  on  the  cliff  overhanging  the  road  at  a place  called  Ogradina. 
The  inscription,  slightly  supplied  by  Arnett  in  a memoir  (Wien,  1856),  points 
• to  the  year  101.  (Trajan,  trib.  pot.  iv.  cons,  iv.)  while  he  was  Germanicus,  but 
not  yet  Haeicus : “ inontis  et  fluvii  anfractibus  superatis  \iam  patefecit.” 


A.  U.  857.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


191 


seems  to  be  refuted  by  a modern  discovery.  A little  below 
Orsova  the  Danube  issues  from  the  Iron  Gate,  and  at  a 
village  called  Severin,  where  it  expands  to  a width  of  1300 
yards,  the  foundations  of  piers,  corresponding  in  number 
with  the  statement  of  the  historian,  have  been  seen  when  the 
water  was  more  than  usually  low.  Here,  then,  as  is  now 
generally  agreed,  stood  the  bridge  of  Trajan’s 

& J . ..  , ° . Trajan’s  stone 

architect,  Apollodorus.1 *  The  passage  of  the  river  bridge  oyer  the 

„ ; 1 . t 1 , Danube. 

at  be venn  would  point  to  the  V olcan,  at  the 
head  of  the  Schyl,  as  the  pass  through  which  Trajan  pene- 
trated into  Dacia ; but  in  this  direction,  it  seems,  there  are 
no  vestiges  of  a Roman  causeway,  whereas  such  a road  un- 
doubtedly led  from  Gieli  to  the  Rothenthurm  by  the  line  of 
the  Aluta.  The  question  does  not  appear  to  me  satisfactorily 
settled ; but  the  correspondence  between  the  account  of 
Dion  and  the  existing  indications  of  a bridge  is  tolerably 
close,  and  it  would  be  perhaps  excessive  caution  to  withhold 
assent  from  the  opinion  now  commonly  received.3 

It  seems  to  have  been  Trajan’s  policy  to  establish  a per- 
manent connexion  between  the  opposite  banks,  so  that  the 
Roman  forces  might  command  a passage  at  all  Cimengions  of 
seasons  without  delay  or  impediment.  The  foun-  Trajan’s  bridge, 
dations  he  laid  were  enormous  piles  of  masonry,  capable  of 
bearing  the  greatest  weights,  and  resisting  the  utmost  press- 
ure of  ice  or  water.  The  superstructure  was  probably  of 
wood;  for  though  I cannot  believe  the  statement  that  the 
span  of  the  arches  was  110  Roman,  or  163  English  feet,  the 
dimensions  were  undoubtedly  such  as  would  hardly  admit  of 
solid  stonework.3  The  vast  preparations  urged  hastily  for- 

1 That  the  bridge  was  the  work  of  Apollodorus,  of  whom  more  hereafter,  is 
stated  by  Procopius,  JEdif.  iv.  6. 

5 Francke,  p.  128,  129.,  seems  to  show  that  Gieli,  about  220  miles  below 
Belgrade,  150  miles  below  Severin,  answers  to  the  conditions  required  in  every 
respect,  except  its  distance  from  the  presumed  base  of  Trajan’s  operations. 
There  are  remains  there,  also,  of  piers  and  towers,  very  similar  to  those  at 
Severin. 

* Dion’s  measurements  are  150  Roman  feet  for  the  height  of  the  arches, 


192 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  I).  105. 


ward,  for  putting  an  effectual  curb  on  tbeir  aggressions, 
alarmed  the  Dacians,  and  several  tribes  seem  to  have  repeated 
their  submission.  Decebalus  sought  to  avert  the  attack  by 
another  capitulation.  But  the  demands  of  Trajan  were  now 
so  severe  and  peremptory,  that  the  barbarian  was  driven  to 
despair,  and  making  a last  effort  for  independence,  assembled 
all  his  vassals,  and  warned  them  that  the  defection  of  one 
must  draw  down  ruin  upon  all,  for  the  Romans  were  deter- 
mined to  complete  their  subjugation.  The  Dacian  was  brave 
and  resolute ; nor  need  we  doubt  that  he  was  cunning  also, 
and  treacherous.  The  Romans  asserted  that  he  tried  to  repel 
the  invasion  by  assassinating  their  commander.  His  emis- 
sary gained  admission  to  the  presence  of  the  fearless  and 
affable  imperator,  and  drew  a dagger  upon  him.  Arrested 
and  put  to  the  torture,  he  divulged  the  treachery  of  his 
master.  Decebalus  then  resorted  to  another  device.  He 
Device  of  De-  entrapped  Longinus,  a distinguished  Roman  of- 
toinfevourabie  ^ceL  and  required  him  to  disclose  the  plans  of 
terms.  }) is  imperator.  The  Roman  gallantly  refused; 

and  Decebalus  had  the  magnanimity  to  respect  his  courage, 
and  to  release  him  from  his  bonds.  He  retained  him,  how- 
ever, as  a hostage,  and  demanded  honourable  terms  of  peace 
for  his  ransom.  The  Romans,  indeed,  jiretended  that  he 
insisted  on  the  evacuation  of  the  Dacian  soil  to  the  banks  of 
the  Danube,  together  with  an  indemnity  for  the  expenses  of 
the  war.  Whatever  were  the  terms  really  proposed,  Trajan, 
much  as  he  valued  his  officer,  could  not  assent  to  them. 
Nothing  but  the  overthrow  of  Decebalus,  and  the  thorough 


conquest  of  his  whole  realm,  would  now  satisfy  him.  He 
Gallantry  of  returned,  however,  an  evasive  answer,  by  which 
Longinus.  ]lfc  deterred  the  enemy  from  slaying  his  prisoner. 


ITO  for  the  sp»n,  and  4W0  for  the  entire  length  of  the  structure.  The  Roman 
foot  is  to  the  English  as  11.5  to  12.  Paget’s  estimate  of  3900  feet  for  the 
length  would  be  more  than  500  feet  short  of  Dion’s.  The  height,  according  to 
Dion’s  statement,  seems  to  me  incredible.  He  was  himself  governor  of  Pan- 
nonia  about  120  years  later,  but  the  bridge  had  been  overthrown  long  before. 
The  piers,  of  course,  were  of  stone,  but  the  superstructure  must  have  been  of 
wood,  which,  indeed,  is  borne  out  by  the  sculptures  of  the  Trajan  column. 


A.  U.  858.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


193 


Longinus,  sensible  of  the  difficulty  in  which  his  leader  was 
involved,  determined  to  relieve  him  by  his  own  voluntary 
death.  Pretending  to  concert  a reconciliation  between  the 
two  chiefs,  he  sent  a freedman  to  Trajan,  with  a secret  mes- 
sage, conjuring  him  to  prosecute  the  war  with  unflinching 
vigour.  Meanwhile  he  had  got  possession  of  some  poison, 
which,  as  soon  as  the  messenger  left  him,  he  swallowed. 
When  Decebalus  discovered  that  he  had  been  cajoled,  he 
demanded  the  surrender  of  the  freedman,  offering  to  return 
the  dead  body  in  exchange;  but  Trajan  magnanimously 
refused  to  barter  the  living  for  the  dead,  and  the  Dacian’s 
revenge  was  frustrated.1 

While  the  bridge  was  building  Trajan  was  preparing  the 
plan  of  his  campaign,  collecting  his  forces  and  magazines, 
and  negotiating  with  the  neighbouring  tribes. 

0 3 & ° Defeat  of  the 

He  crossed  the  Danube  with  an  overwhelming  Dacians,  aDd 

dcut/li  of  Deco- 

force,  and  extended  his  operations  over  a large  baius, 

n . ..  _ , . A.  D.  106. 

tract  oi  country,  constructing  roads  and  planting 
fortifications,  to  form  a secure  basis  for  the  complete  reduc- 
tion of  the  Dacian  strongholds.  He  seems  to  have  struck 
eastward,  as  far  at  least  as  the  Schyl  or  Aluta,  and  thence 
to  have  ascended  to  the  Rothenthurm,  from  which  he  burst 
with  irresistible  fury  on  the  valley  of  the  Maros.  Decebalus 
was  wholly  unable  to  contend  with  him  in  the  field,  but  still 
maintained  an  obstinate  but  aimless  and  ineffectual  defence 
behind  the  streams,  or  among  the  defiles  of  the  mountains, 
till  he  was  finally  driven  into  the  heart  of  Transylvania. 
Such  a campaign  may  have  exercised  the  skill  of  the  Roman 
general  and  his  officers,  and  given  scope  to  the  display  of 
personal  valour  and  conduct  in  his  soldiers ; but  it  was  dis- 
tinguished by  no  glorious  exploits  of  arms,  and  the  poem 
which  Pliny  urges  his  friend  Caninius  to  consecrate  to  it, 
must  have  been  overlaid  with  heavy  descriptions  of  mechan- 
ical operations,  or  have  evaporated  in  a cloud  of  dull  pane- 
gyrics, but  for  the  devotion  of  Longinus  and  other  feats  of 

1 Dion,  lxviii.  12. 

124  yoL.  vii.— 


J 94 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  1C  j. 


personal  heroism,  such  as  were  never  wanting  in  the  Roman 
armies.1  Trajan’s  final  success  was  indeed  secured  hv  the 
defection  of  the  Sarmatians,  the  Iazyges,  and  the  Burri,  from 
the  common  cause  of  the  barbarians.  All  the  passes  were 
now  in  the  hands  of  the  Romans,  and  the  central  regions  fell 
step  by  step  into  their  possession.  The  hill  fort,  in  which  the 
Dacian  chieftain  held  his  residence,  was  stormed  after  a 
desperate  resistance,  and  Decebalus  fell  on  his  own  sword 
amidst  the  ruins  of  his  capital.  The  nobles  of  the  conquered 
land  followed  the  example  of  their  sovereign,  first  firing  their 
houses,  and  then  handing  round  the  poisoned  bowl.  Such  is 
the  scene  represented  on  the  column  at  Rome,  which  still 
records  in  monumental  sculpture  the  chief  features  of  this 
memorable  struggle.  The  head  of  Decebalus  was  sent  as  a 
trophy  to  Rome,  a downward  step  towards  barbarism,  which 
marks  the  coarseness  of  feeling  engendered  in  the  frontier 
camps  of  civilization.  Decebalus  had  concealed  his  treasures 
under  a heap  of  stones  in  the  bed  of  a river,  the  stream  of 
which  had  been  first  turned,  and  then  suffered  to  flow  again 
over  it.3  The  captives  employed  in  the  work  had  been  put 
to  death  to  prevent  its  disclosure.  Nevertheless  the  secret 
had  been  revealed  to  Trajan,  and  the  precious  hoards  thus 
recovered  sufficed  to  reward  the  valour  of  the  veterans,  to 
defray  the  expenses  of  the  war,  and  to  perpetuate  the  mem- 
ory of  the  achievement  by  the  column  erected  in  a neu 
forum  at  Rome.3 

1 Pliny,  JSpist.  viii.  1. : “quae  tam  recens,  tain  copiosa,  tam  lata,  quae  deni- 
que  tam  poetica  et,  quanquam  in  verissimis  rebus,  tam  fabulosa  materia  ? ” 
The  delineation  of  the  bridge  on  the  Trajan  column  is  followed  by  that  of 
sieges  and  skirmishes,  rather  than  of  regular  battles. 

2 Dion,  lxviii.  14.,  calls  this  river  the  Sargetia  (the  Strehl),  on  which  Zer- 
mizegethusa  or  Yarhely  stood.  But  this  valley  had  been  acquired  in  the  first 
campaign,  and  the  spot  where  the  treasures  were  concealed  might  be  expected 
to  be  more  remote. 

3 A part  of  Trajan’s  spoil  was  dedicated  to  Jupiter  Casius.  Suidas : Kairioc 
Zeiif  iv&a  T palavdg  avkdtjKe  uparfjpag  apyvpovp,  aKpodivia  Tf/p  Kara  tuv  Terav 
viKTjp.  Hadrian  furnished  the  votive  inscription  : 'Lrpvl  r66  ’ A IvedSrjp  Kaciip 
Tpaiavog  ayaXpi,  The  second  war  ended  in  106.  “Trajan,  imp.  v.  cons,  v ’ 
See  the  medals. 


A.  U.  858. J 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


195 


The  resistance  of  the  Dacians,  broken,  abandoned,  and 
already  more  than  half  subdued,  ceased  with  the  death  of 
their  chief.  Trajan  had  determined  to  add  an-  . 

J # . Dacia  reduced 

other  wide  province  to  the  empire.  A loner  period  to  the  form  of  a 

A # 1 • it  province. 

of  restless  aggressions,  checked  occasionally  and 
chastised  with  bloody  severity,  followed  by  four  years  of  war 
carried  on  in  the  heart  of  the  country  with  all  the  barbarity  of 
a ruder  age  and  all  the  means  and  resources  of  the  imperial 
civilization,  had  exhausted,  and,  as  it  would  seem,  nearly  de- 
populated the  whole  of  Dacia.  The  emperor  invited  settlers 
from  all  parts  of  his  dominions,  and  repeopled  the  land  with  so 
many  Roman  colonists, — with  colonists  at  least  of  Latin  race 
and  speech,— that  the  language  of  the  empire  became,  and  to 
this  day  substantially  remains,  the  national  tongue  of  the  in- 
habitants.1 The  possession  of  the  territory  was  secured  by 
the  foundation  of  four  colonies  at  Zermizegethusa,  Apulum, 
Napuca,  and  Cerna.2  The  extent  of  the  new  province,  which 
was  bounded  by  the  Danube  on  the  south,  by  the  Theiss  on 
the  west,  by  the  Carpathians  on  the  north,  was  not  perhaps 
accurately  determined  amid  the  boundless  steppes  in  which 
it  lost  itself  eastward.  Ptolemy  indeed  makes  the  Hierassus, 
or  Pruth,  the  eastern  frontier ; but  Roman  plantations,  and 
possibly  military  stations,  also  reached  even  to  the  Dniester, 

1 Eutrop.  viii.  3. : “ ex  toto  orbe  Rom.  infinitas  eo  copias  hominmn  trans- 
tulerat,  ad  agros  et  urbes  colendas.  Dacia  enim  diutumo  bello  Decebali  viris 
fuerat  exhausta.”  Trajan  introduced  the  novel  principle  of  forbidding  the 
transplantation  of  citizens  from  Italy  ; but  whether  before  or  after  the  founda- 
tion of  his  own  colonies  in  Dacia  does  not  appear.  Capitolinus  speaks  of  a 
later  emperor  who  violated  this  rule  (M.  Aurel.  11.):  “Hispaniis  exhaustis, 
Italica  allectione,  contra  Trajani  praecepta,  verecunde  consuluit.” 

2 The  first  of  these  was  officially  designated  CoL  Ulpia  Trajana,  and  may 
be  traced,  from  inscriptions  and  other  remains,  at  Varhely.  Apulum  (CoL 
Apulensis,  Ulpian.  Dig.  xv.  8.)  is  supposed  to  be  Karlsburg  in  the  upper  valley 
of  the  Maros.  Napuca  is  identified  by  the  distances  in  the  Peutinger  Table 
with  Maros-Vasarhely.  (Francke,  p.  173.)  Cerna  or  Dierna  (Ptolem.  iii.  8. 
10.)  is  mentioned  as  a colony  of  Trajan  by  Ulpian,  1.  c.  It  seems  to  have  stood 
on  the  little  stream  which  bears  the  name  of  Tjerna,  and  to  have  been  at  or 
near  to  Mehadia,  long  celebrated  for  its  saline  baths. 


196 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


[A.D.  107. 


and  some  critics  have  imagined  that  the  Roman  occupation 
was  propagated  as  far  as  the  Don.1  The  narrow  strip  be- 
tween the  Theiss  and  the  Danube,  from  which  the  Dacian 
tribes  had  been  expelled  by  the  people  known  as  the  lazyges 
Metanastse,  seems,  strange  as  it  may  appear,  to  have  been 
never  included  in  any  Roman  province.2  It  was  no  doubt  a 
tract  of  mere  swamp  and  jungle.  The  triple  division  of  the 
Dacian  province  into  Ripensis,  Apulensis,  and  Alpensis,  refers 
to  the  three  districts  of  Wallachia,  the  Banat  with  Transyl- 
vania, and  the  upper  valley  of  the  Theiss,  or  the  hill  country 
from  which  that  stream  descends.  Mcesia  now  ceased  to  he 
a frontier  province ; the  great  road  which  led  into  the  moun- 
tains along  the  hanks  of  the  Aluta  conveyed  the  presidiary 
legions  from  the  stations  they  had  so  long  occupied  on  the 
Danube  to  the  heart  of  Transylvania.  Nevertheless  Mcesia 
might  still  retain  its  importance,  as  a base  of  operations,  if 
force  should  ever  be  required  to  retain  the  conquered  Dacians 
in  subjection,  and  Trajan  took  further  measures  to  secure  it  by 
the  establishment  ivithin  it  of  the  two  colonies  of  CEscus  and 
Ratiaria  on  the  river-bank.3  He  built  also  the  town  of  Nico- 
polis,  named  after  his  victories,  in  a strong  position  on  the 
slopes  of  the  Hsemus.  To  him  and  his  lieutenants  are  as- 
cribed the  vestiges  of  Roman  causeways,  and  of  ramparts  and 
trenches  long  supposed  to  be  Roman,  with  which  the  low- 
lands of  Wallachia  and  the  Banat  are  still  deeply  scarred  ; 
but  the  last  at  least,  whether  their  date  precede  or  follow  the 
Roman  occupation,  are  now  generally  considered  to  be  the 
works  of  the  barbarians. 

1 Francke,  p.  180. 

2 The  geography  of  Dacia  is  known  chiefly  from  a chapter  in  Ptolemy 
(iii.  8.),  to  which  a few  notices  may  be  added  from  the  Augustan  Histories  and 
the  inscriptions.  See  Francke’s  Gesch.  Trajans,  and  Marquardt  (Becker’s 
Handb.  der  Alterih.  iii.  1.  108.). 

3 Ratiaria  is  placed  at  or  near  to  Widdin.  CEscus  lay  considerably  further 
east.  Trajan’s  Nicopolis  (N7/c<57ro/Uf  vrepl  AI/j,ov}  Ptol.)  mentioned  by  Amm. 
Marcell.  xxxi.  5. 16.  and  placed  by  Jornandes  on  the  Iatra  (mod.  Iantra),  is  not 
to  be  confounded  with  the  modem  Nicopolis  or  Nikup,  on  the  Danube.  See' 
Francke,  p.  160, 


A.  U.  860.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


197 


Of  the  Dacian  province,  the  last  acquired  and  the  first 
to  be  surrendered  of  the  Roman  possessions,  if  we  except 
some  transient  occupations,  soon  to  be  comraem-  Tlie  m01TO_ 
orated,  in  the  East,  not  many  traces  now  exist ; p®5^i°coi^e 
but  even  these  may  suffice  to  mark  the  moulding  quest- 
power  of  Roman  civilization,  which  impressed  on  this  dis- 
tant region  the  same  type  of  culture  which  we  recognise  in 
Spain  and  Britain,  in  Africa  and  Asia.  The  conquests  of 
Trajan  are  indelibly  engraved  on  coins  and  marbles,  while 
the  accents  of  the  old  Roman  tongue  still  echo  in  the  valleys 
of  Hungary  and  Wallachia;  the  descendants  of  the  Dacians 
at  the  present  day  repudiate  the  appellation  of  W allachs,  or 
strangers,  and  still  claim  the  name  of  Rom  uni.  Interesting, 
however,  as  these  records  are  of  a conquest  which  left  such 
slight  and  transient  political  traces,  the  wars  of  Dacia  are 
eminently  distinguished  by  their  sculptured  monument,  still 
standing  in  its  pristine  majesty,  and  embalmed  in  the  glory 
of  nearly  eighteen  centuries,  the  column  of  Trajan  at  Rome. 
After  his  return  to  Rome,  and  the  celebration  of 

. . Trajan’s  forum. 

a triumph,  with  spectacles  on  a grander  scale 
than  ever,  the  conqueror  of  Dacia  resolved  to  immortalize 
the  memory  of  his  epoch,  by  the  construction  of  a forum 
which  should  surpass  in  extent  and  splendour  every  similar 
work  of  the  Caesars  before  him.1  The  emperors  from  Julius 
downwards,  had  contributed  towards  opening  an  outlet  for 
the  traffic  of  the  old  Roman  forum  into  the  Campus  Martins, 
to  the  right  of  the  Capitoline.  But  this  eminence,  which  now 
stands  out  disconnected  from  the  encircling  ridge  of  the 
Roman  hills,  was,  down  to  this  period,  no  more  than  a bold 
projecting  spur  of  the  Quirinal,  and  the  slope  which  united 
the  one  with  the  other  formed  a barrier  to  the  advance  of  the 
imperial  builders.  The  splendours  of  the  city,  and  the  splen- 
dours of  the  Campus  beyond  it,  were  still  separated  by  a 
narrow  isthmus,  thronged  perhaps  with  the  squalid  cabins 

1 Dion,  lxviii.  15.,  specifies  the  number  of  days  of  these  spectacles,  viz., 
23  ; the  number  of  beasts  slain,  viz.,  11,000  ; the  number  of  gladiators  who 
fought,  viz.,  10,000.  This  triumph  was  celebrated  a,  d.  107,  a.  u.  860. 


198 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  107 


of  the  poor,  and  surmounted  by  the  remains  of  the  Servian 
wall  which  ran  along  its  summit.1  Step  by  step  the  earlier 
emperors  had  approached  with  their  new  forums  to  the  foot 
of  this  obstruction.  Domitian  was  the  first  to  contemplate 
and  commence  its  removal.2  Nerva  had  the  fortune  to  conse- 
crate and  to  give  his  own  name  to  a portion  of  his  predeces- 
sor’s construction  ; 3 but  Trajan  undertook  to  complete  the 
bold  design,  and  the  genius  of  his  architect  triumphed  over 
all  obstacles,  and  executed  a work  which  exceeded  in  extent 
and  splendour  any  previous  achievement  of  the  kind.  He 
swept  away  every  building  on  the  site,  levelled  the  spot  on 
which  they  had  stood,  and  laid  out  a vast  area  of  columnar 
galleries  connecting  halls  and  chambers  for  public  use  and 

recreation.  The  new  forum  was  adorned  with 

Libraries  ba- 

silica  and  tem-  two  libraries,  one  for  Greek,  the  other  for  Roman 
pie.  . 1 

volumes,  and  it  was  bounded  on  the  west  by  a 
basilica  of  magnificent  dimensions.  Beyond  this  basilica, 
and  within  the  limits  of  the  Campus,  the  same  architect  erect- 
ed a temple  for  the  worship  of  Trajan  himself;  but  this  work 
belonged  probably  to  the  reign  of  Trajan’s  successor,  and  no 
doubt  the  TJlpian  forum,  with  all  its  adjuncts,  occupied  many 
years  in  building.4  The  area  was  adorned  with  numerous 

1 The  fact  of  this  connection  between  the  Quirinal  and  the  Capitoline  seems 
to  be  put  beyond  a doubt  by  the  inscription  on  the  base  of  the  Trajan  column, 
which  purports  to  have  been  erected  to  show  how  deep  was  the  excavation 
made  for  the  area  of  the  forum  : “ ad  declarandum  quant®  altitudinis  mons  et 
locus  tantis  operibus  sit  egestus.”  This  statement  is  confirmed  by  the  words 
of  Dion,  lxviii.  16.:  If  eiridei^iv  rov  Kara,  rryv  ayopav  ipyov  iravTog  yap  rov 
Xopiov  indvov  opeivov  ovrog , Karlcvcai^E  touovtov  baov  6 kluv  aviaxot,  Kal  rf/v 
ayopav  in  tovtov  nedivi/v  Kareautvaas  ■ but  it  seems  quite  inexplicable. 

2 Victor,  Coes.  13. : “ adhuc  Romse  a Domitiano  coepta  fora,  atque  alia 
mnlta  plusquam  magnifica  coluit  ornavitque.” 

3 Suet . Domit.  5.:  “forum,  quod  nunc  Nerv®  vocatur.”  This  forum  was 
also  called  Transitorium  or  Pervium  ; it  seems  undoubtedly  to  have  been  be- 
gun by  Domitian,  or,  rather,  by  Vespasian,  and  to  have  been  adorned  with 
Domitian’s  temple  of  Minerva  ; hence  “ Palladium  forum.” 

4 Apollodorus  is  specified  as  the  architect  by  Dion,  lxix.  4.  The  authorities 
for  the  description  of  the  forum,  &c.,  are  numerous,  and  have  been  collected 
by  the  topographers.  See  Becker,  p.  378,  foil  It  is  most  improbable  that 


A a.  860.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


199 


statues,  in  which  the  figure  of  Trajan  was  frequently  repeat- 
ed, and  among  its  decorations  were  groups  in  bronze  or  mar- 
ble representing  his  most  illustrious  actions.  The  balustrades 
and  cornices  of  the  whole  mass  of  buildings  flamed  with 
gilded  images  of  arms  and  horses.  Here  stood  the  great 
equestrian  statue  of  the  emperor;  here  was  the  triumphal 
arch  decreed  him  by  the  senate,  adorned  with  sculpture, 
which  Constantine,  two  centuries  later,  transferred  without 
a blush  to  his  own,  a barbarous  act  of  the  first  Christian  em- 
peror, to  which  however  we  probably  owe  their  preservation 
to  this  day  from  still  more  barbarous  spoliation.1 

Amidst  this  profusion  of  splendour,  the  great  object  to 
which  the  eye  was  principally  directed  was  the  column,  which 
rose  majestically  in  the  centre  of  the  forum  to  Trajan'S  col_ 
the  height  of  128  feet,  sculptured  from  the  base  umn- 
of  the  shaft  to  the  summit  with  the  story  of  the  Dacian  wars, 
shining  in  every  volute  and  moulding  with  gold  and  pig- 
ments, and  crowned  with  the  colossal  effigy  of  the  august 
conqueror.3  The  Greek  and  Roman  artists  had  long  felt  the 
want  of  some  device  for  breaking  the  horizontal  lines  so  prev- 
alent in  their  architecture  ; and  to  this  feeling  we  may  per- 
haps attribute  the  erection  of  the  Egyptian  obelisks,  by 
Augustus  and  others,  in  the  public  places  of  Rome.  The 

the  temple  of  Trajan  should  have  been  erected  during  his  lifetime,  and  the 
place  it  occupied  beyond  the  basilica  seems  to  shows  that  it  was  a later  addi- 
tion. Trajan’s  triumphal  arch  was  completed  or  decorated  by  Hadrian,  as 
appears  from  a figure  of  Hadrian’s  favourite  Antinous  on  one  of  the  medallions 
which  have  been  transferred  from  it  to  the  arch  of  Constantine.  Hiiller,  Denk- 
mciler  der  Alien  Kunst,  p.  51. 

1 The  subjects  of  these  bas-reliefs  show  that  they  belonged  to  Trajan’s 
arch.  The  arch  of  Constantine  may  have  been  preserved  in  ages  of  Christian 
barbarism  by  respect  for  the  memory  of  the  great  Christian  emperor.  Vopiscus 
(in  Prob.  2.)  speaks  of  the  books  of  Trajan’s  libraries  as  removed  to  the  baths 
of  Diocletian,  a dangerous  locality  for  such  combustible  articles.  But  we 
gather  from  Sidonius  Apollinaris  that  they  still  occupied  their  original  place  in 
the  fifth  century. 

2 The  column  is  referred  to  in  Gell.  xiii.  24. ; Pausan.  v.  12.  6. ; Amm, 
Marcell.  xvi.  11.  See  the  topographers,  &c.  Eor  the  fact  that  it  was  coloured, 
see  Francke,  Gesdi.  Traj.  p.  188. 


200 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  107. 


Greeks  seem  to  have  often  used  the  column  for  this  purpose ; 1 
but  a column,  the  emblem  of  supporting  power,  with  nothing 
to  rest  upon  it,  however  graceful  in  itself,  must  have  seemed 
to  lack  meaning,  which  the  urn  or  ball  by  which  it  was 
sometimes  surmounted  would  hardly  supply.  But  the  statue 
of  a god  or  a hero  imparted  at  least  a moral  dignity  to  the 
pillar,  on  which  it  might  seem  to  have  alighted  on  its  flight 
from  heaven  to  earth,  or  from  earth  to  heaven.  The  propor- 
tions of  the  Trajan  column  are  peculiarly  graceful ; the  com- 
pact masses  of  stone,  nineteen  in  number,  of  which  the  whole 
shaft  is  composed,  may  lead  us  to  admire  the  skill  employed 
in  its  construction  ; but  the  most  interesting  feature  of  this 
historic  monument  is  the  spiral  band  of  figures  which 
throughout  encircles  it.2  To  the  subjects  of  Trajan  himself 
this  record  of  his  exploits  in  bold  relief  must  have  given 
a vivid  and  sufficient  idea  of  the  people,  the  places,  and  the 
actions  indicated ; even  to  us,  after  so  many  centuries,  they 
furnish  a correct  type  of  the  arms,  the  arts,  and  the  costume 
both  of  the  Romans  and  barbarians,  which  we  should  vainly 
seek  for  elsewhere.  The  Trajan  column  forms  a notable 
chapter  in  the  pictorial  history  of  Rome. 

ISTor  was  the  conquest  of  Dacia  the  only  triumph  of  the 
Roman  arms  under  the  auspices  of  a soldier-emperor.  At 

the  same  moment,  while  Trajan  was  advancing 

Acquisitions  of  . . ' _ . 

Cornelius  Pal-  the  frontiers  m the  north,  his  lieutenant  Cornelius 
ma  in  Arabia.  „ 

Raima,  the  governor  ot  byna,  was  annexing  a 
new  district  to  the  great  proconsulate  of  the  east.  The  ill- 
defined  frontier  from  Damascus  to  the  Red  Sea  was  always 
subject  to  attack  from  the  petty  half-nomade  chiefs,  who 
flitted  from  tent  to  village  along  the  border  of  the  Arabian 
desert.  The  principal  stations  of  the  tribes  who  caused  this 
constant  annoyance  were  at  Gerasa,  Bostra,  Philadelphia,  and 

1 The  fashion  of  placing  statues  on  columns  was  adopted  from  the  Greeks. 
See  Pliny,  Hist.  Hat.  xxxiv.  6. 

2 The  statue  of  Trajan  had  long  fallen  from  its  lofty  pedestal  when  it  was 
replaced  with  a figure  of  St.  Peter  by  Pope  Sixtus  Y.  Beneath  the  column  waa 
a sepulchral  chamber,  designed  for  the  ashes  of  the  emperor. 


A.  U.  860.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


"01 


Petra,  and  it  was  necessary  to  protect  the  eastern  slopes  of 
the  Jor  dan  valley  by  the  complete  reduction  of  these  places.1 
A sing-le  campaign,  conducted  with  energy  and  determination, 
sufficed  perhaps  to  lodge  the  Roman  eagles  in  these  border 
citadels,  from  whence  the  country  could  be  kept  in  permanent 
subjection.  The  great  caravan  lines  between  the  Euphrates 
and  the  Red  Sea  were  secured.  The  emporiums  of  Arabian 
commerce  were  placed  under  the  authority  of  Roman  gov- 
ernors, and  enjoyed  for  some  centuries  the  protection  of  Ro- 
man garrisons.  Among  them  Petra  rose  to  peculiar  emi- 
nence, and  the  remarkable  ruins  still  existing  on  its  site 
attest  at  least  the  extent  of  its  population  and  the  splendour 
of  its  architecture.  This  district,  which  was  one  of  the  latest 
of  the  Roman  acquisitions,  continued  to  be  attached  to  the 
empire  for  several  succeeding  centuries.2 

The  ideas  of  the  great  conquering  people  were  still  dilat- 
ing with  the  swelling  consciousness  of  their  power  and  mag- 
nificence. The  vast  dimensions  of  Trajan’s  architectural 
erection  might  put  to  blush  the  imperial  builders  of  earlier 
times.  The  Ulpian  forum,  with  all  its  accessories,  occupied 
a larger  space  than  those  of  Julius,  Augustus,  and  Kerva  to- 
gether ; while  the  open  area  of  the  old  Roman  forum  might 
have  been  contained  within  the  precincts  of  the  ITlpian  basilica 

1 Dion,  Ixviii.  14.,  whose  epitomator  dismisses  the  subject  in  a single  sen- 
tence. Ammian.  Marcell.  xiv.  8. : “ hsec  quoque  civitates  habet  inter  oppida 
quaedam  ingentes,  Bostram  et  Gerasam  et  Philadelphiam.  Hanc,  provincice 
imposito  nomine,  reetoreque  attributo,  obtemperare  legibus  nostris  Trajanus 
compulit  imperator.”  Damascus,  hitherto  subjected  nominally  to  the  rule  of  a 
native  family,  which  bore  the  name  of  Aretas,  and  resided  in  Petra  (Joseph. 
Aniiq.  xiii.  1.5.  2. ; S.  Paul,  2 Cor.  si.  32.),  though  occupied  by  a Roman 
garrison  (Joseph.  Antiq.  xiv.  11.  7.),  was  now  formally  incorporated  in  the 
Syrian  province.  Becker,  Handb.  der  Alterihumer,  iii.  1.  183.  Eckhel,  Docir. 
Numm.  iii.  p.  330. 

2 Dion,  Ixrv.  1.  2. ; Eutrop.  viii.  18.  See  also  the  Notilia  dign. . (Becker, 
Allerthiimer , iii.  1.  203.)  The  people  of  Petra  and  Bostra  accepted  the  date 
of  the  Roman  conquest  for  their  chronological  era.  Chron.  Pasch.  L p.  472. : 
n erpaioi  k at  Boorpr/vol  kvrevQev  roiig  iavrav  XP^V0VS  apidgovoi,  i.  e.  from 
A.  d.  105. 


202 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  107. 


alone.1  It  is  much  to  he  regretted  that  no  account  of  it,  and 
indeed  no  reference  to  it,  is  given  by  a contempo- 

Few  remaining  , 

notices  of  the  rary  author.  ±>ut  Martial,  who  has  supplied  us 
Ulpian  forum.  . 11 

with  many  hints,  at  least  oi  the  architectual  glo- 
ries of  Nero  and  Domitian,  had  retired  to  his  native  Bilbilis 
before  the  commencement  of  the  works  in  which  the  grandi- 
osity of  Spanish  taste  was  first  exemplified  in  marble ; the 
panegyric  of  Pliny  had  been  already  pronounced,  and  the 
letters  comprised  in  his  collection  belong  to  an  earlier  date.3 
Juvenal,  who  is  not  wholly  silent  on  other  buildings  of  Trajan, 
has  no  allusion  to  the  forum  or  the  column ; and  indeed  this 
writer,  while  he  describes  life  at  Rome  in  almost  every  line 
of  almost  all  his  satires,  is  strangely  deficient  in  topographical 
notices.  Tacitus  reserved  a work  on  the  Affairs  of  Trajan 
for  the  solace  of  an  old  age  which  possibly  he  never  attained. 
Since  the  fall  of  Domitian,  Suetonius  has  deserted  us,  and  the 
era  at  which  we  are  now  arrived  stands  on  the  verge  of  a 
great  chasm  in  Roman  literature.  At  a much  later  period 
we  get  occasional  glimpses  of  the  Ulpian  forum,  which  seems 
to  have  long  retained  its  paramount  dignity  among  the  re- 
mains of  ancient  magnificence.  It  was  here  that  the  empe- 
rors long  sate  in  state,  attended  by  the  lictors  with  their 
gilded  fasces  ; and  here,  in  the  last  decline  or  revival  of  old 
traditions,  when  there  were  no  longer  emperors  at  Rome,  the 
consuls  continued  to  create  new  Quirites  by  manumission  on 
the  kalends  of  January.3  When  the  second  of  the  Christian 

1 See  the  ichnography  of  this  series  of  buildings  in  Becker’s  Handbuch, 
taken  from  Canina’s  Indicazione  Topografica , and  adopted  in  the  art.  “ Roma 
Smith’s  Diet,  of  Class.  Geography. 

2 The  date  of  the  dedication  of  the  Trajan  column  is  inscribed  on  its  base, 
and  answers  to  the  17th  year  of  his  reign,  a.v.  114.  The  latest  of  Pliny’s 
letters  that  can  be  dated  belongs  to  the  year  107,  but  the  period  of  his  death  is 
unknown. 

8 Claudian,  xxviii.  646. : 

“ desuetaque  cingit 

Regius  auratis  fora  fascibus  Ulpia  lictor,” 

Sidon  Apoll. : « 

“ ad  Ulpia  poscunt 

Te  fora  donabis  quos  libertate  Quirites.” 


4.  E 860..] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


203 


and  Byzantine  Caesars  visited  the  abandoned  capital,  he  was 
struck  with  tne  glories  of  this  spot,  which  even  then  had  no 
rival  in  splendour  under  heaven.1  Even  its  decorations 
seem  to  have  been  singularly  respected.  Five  hundred  years 
after  the  Dacian  triumph,  when  Rome  had  been  taken  and 
retaken  by  Goths,  Lombards,  and  Greeks,  and  had  suffered 
from  earthquakes  and  inundations,  from  natural  decay  and 
squalid  poverty,  more  than  even  from  the  violence  of  the 
spoiler,  a legend,  which  seems  not  wholly  groundless,  relates 
how  Pope  Gregory  the  Great,  traversing  the  forum  of  Tra- 
jan, was  struck  with  the  sight  of  a group  in  bronze,  one  of 
the  many  works  still  conspicuous  on  the  spot,  in  which  a 
generous  action  of  its  imperial  founder  was  vividly  repre- 
sented.2 

The  TJlpian  forum,  however,  though  the  largest  and  the 
most  interesting,  was  by  no  means  the  only  construction  of 
this  emperor  at  Rome.  ISTo  reign  perhaps  was  marked  by 
more  extensive  alterations  and  additions  to  the 

. . „ . . Other  buildings 

existing  features  of  the  city.  Trai an  prolonged  of  Trajan  in 
1 ■ „ . „ , . . . , , ° , the  city. 

the  senes  of  halls  and  porticos  which  decorated 
the  Campus  Martius,  among  which  the  Pantheon  and  the 
Julian  mausoleum  still  rose  preeminent  in  grandeur.  He 
constructed  a theatre  in  the  same  quarter,  which  was  re- 
markable from  its  circular  shape ; he  added  another  gymna- 
sium and  another  odeum  to  the  places  of  the  kind  already 
existing,  consecrated  to  the  display  of  Grecian  arts  and 
accomplishments ; he  gave  to  the  people  new  thermae,  the  site 

1 See  tlie  account  of  the  visit  of  Constantius  in  Ammianus,  xvi.  6. : “ cum 
ad  Trajani  forum  venisset,  singularem  sub  omni  cselo  structuram.”  Cassiodor. 
Variar.  vii.  6. ; Victor,  de  Region,  viii. 

2 The  incident  is  related  by  the  biographers  of  Gregory,  John  and  Paul 
Diaconus,  and  by  John  of  Salisbury,  De  eurial.  magis. v.  8.  The  group  repre- 
sented Trajan  dismounting  to  listen  to  a female  petitioner,  who  would  not  be 
put  off  with  a distant  promise  of  an  audience  when  he  should  return  from  the 
wars.  The  Pontiff,  it  is  added,  prayed  for  the  soul  of  the  righteous  heathen, 
»nd  received  an  assurance  that  Trajan’s  soul  should  be  released  from  Purgatory. 
Comp.  Dante,  Purgat.  x.  V 8. ; Farad,  xx.  40.  As  regards  the  female  petitioner, 
Dion,  it  may  be  observed,  tells  the  story  of  Hadrian,  kk.  6. 


204 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  I).  107. 


of  which  was  near  to  those  of  Titus,  if  indeed  they  were  not 
actually  an  extension  of  the  Flavian  edifice.1  He  brought 
the  waters  of  the  lake  Sabatinus  to  the  Janiculus,  thus  add- 
ing a tenth  to  the  nine  existing  aqueducts  of  the  city.1 2  There 
seems  ground  for  supposing  that  he  completed  the  arch  of 
Titus,  still  unfinished,  on  the  Yelia.  The  Circus  Maximus 
had  been  arranged  by  J ulius  Ctesar  for  the  reception  of  the  whole 
Roman  people,  with  a lower  story  of  masonry,  and  wooden 
galleries  above.  The  wood-work  had  been  swept  away  by 
Nero’s  fire;  the  restoration  of  this  favourite  resort  had  been 
conducted  by  succeeding  emperors ; but  Trajan  earned  popu- 
larity by  enlarging  its  accommodation,  whereby  room  was 
obtained  for  the  still  increasing  multitude  of  the  citizens.3 4 


While,  however,  the  magnificent  emperor  was  intent  on 
raising  the  abode  of  the  Romans  to  the  level  of  their  fortunes, 
inundations  and  earthquakes,  the  most  ancient  and  inveterate 
of  her  foes,  were  making  havoc  of  many  of  her  noblest  build- 
ings ; the  fragments  still  remaining  of  1ST ero’s  brilliant  palace 
were  consumed  by  fire,  the  Pantheon  was  stricken  by  light- 
ning, and  the  calamities  which  befell  the  mistress  of  the 
world  might  point  a moral  for  a Christian  writer  of  a much 
later  date,  who  ascribed  them  to  the  judgment  of  God  on  a 
persecutor  of  his  holy  religion.4 

Of  this  hereafter.  The  princely  prodigality  of  Trajan’s 
taste  was  defrayed  by  the  plunder  or  tribute  of  conquered 
Trajan's  archi-  enemies,  and  seems  to  have  laid  at  least  no  extra- 
hiCtheproy-rk3  ordinary  burdens  on  his  subjects.  His  rage  for 
“ces-  building  had  the  further  merit  of  being  directed 

for  the  most  part  to  works  of  public  interest  and  utility.  He 


1 Pausan.  1.  c.  2 Becker’s  Allcrthumer,  i.  p.  706. 

8 Plin.  Paneg.  61.  Comp.  Dion,  Ixviii.  7.  The  text  of  Pliny  makes  tho 
additional  seats  only  5000,  which  seems  absurd.  Csesar  made  room  for 

260,000,  and  at  a later  period  we  read  of  385,000  or  even  485,000  spectators. 
Possibly  all  these  numbers  are  corrupt. 

4 Orosius,  vii.  12.  To  guard  against  these  disasters  Trajan  limited  the 
height  of  private  dwellings  to  sixty  feet,  or  ten  feet  below  the  maximum  allowed 
by  Augustus.  Victor,  j 'Spit.  13. 


A.  C.  860.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


205 


built  for  the  gods,  the  senate,  and  tlie  people,  not  for  himself; 
he  restored  the  temples,  enlarged  the  halls  and  places  of  pub- 
lic resort ; but  he  was  content  himself  with  the  palaces  of  his 
predecessors.1  Not  in  Rome  only,  but  in  innumerable  places 
throughout  Italy  and  the  provinces,  the  hand  of  Trajan  was 
conspicuous  in  the  structures  he  executed,  some  of  which  still 
attest  the  splendour  of  the  epoch,  and  the  large-minded  pa- 
triotism of  their  author.  An  arch  at  Ancona  still  reminds  us 
that  here  he  constructed  a haven  for  his  navy  on  the  upper 
sea;  and  the  port  of  Civita  Vecchia  is  still  sheltered  by  the  mole 
he  cast  into  the  waters  to  defend  the  roadstead  of  Centum- 
cellse.2  The  bridge'  over  the  Tagus  at  Alcantara  affirms,  by 
an  inscription-still  legible  upon  it,  that  it  was  built  by  J ulius  La- 
cer,  one  of  Trajan’s  favourite  architects,  though  the  cost  was  de- 
frayed, according  to  the  same  interesting  record,  by  the  local 
contributions  of  some  rich  and  spirited  communities.3  A 
writer  three  centuries  later  declares  of  Trajan  that  he  built 
the  world  over  ; and  the  wide  diffusion  and  long  continuance 
of  his  fame,  beyond  that  of  so  many  others  of  the  imperial 
series,  may  be  partly  attributed  to  the  constant  recurrence  of 
his  name  conspicuously  inscribed  on  the  most  solid  and  best 
known  monuments  of  the  empire.4  The  greatest  of  his  suc- 

1 Pliny  even  praises  Trajan  for  his  great  moderation  in  building,  at  least 
within  the  walls  of  Rome : “ idem  tam  parcus  in  sedificando  quam  diligens  u> 
tuendo.”  Paneg,  51. — But  the  Panegyricus,  it  must  be  remembered,  refers 
only  to  the  commencement  of  the  reign. 

2 Pliny,  Ppist.  vi.  31.,  describes  the  port  of  Centumcell®.  Comp,  coins  in 
Eckhel,  inscriptions  in  Gruter,  &c.  To  this,  according  to  the  scholiast,  Juvenal 
alludes,  xii.  75. : 

“ Tandem  intrat  positas  inclusa  per  ®quora  moles, 

Tyrrhenamque  Pharon,  porrectaque  brachia  rursum.” 

9 Francke,  Gesch.  Trajans , p.  584.,  after  Gruter  and  others.  The  dimen- 
sions of  this  work,  as  given  by  Brotier,  are:  height  200  feet,  length  6V0,  width 
28  ; arches  6,  each  of  80  feet  span:  all,  of  course,  in  French  measure.  Trajan 
erected  bridges  also  over  the  Rhine,  the  Euphrates,  and  the  Tigris. 

4 Eutrop.  viii.  2. : “orbem  terrarum  mdificans.”  Several  coins  of  families, 
e.  g.,  iEmilia,  Cassia,  Cornelia  and  others,  attest  the  restoration  by  Trajan  of 
temples  and  basilicas  erected  by  the  great  men  of  the  republic.  See  Brotier’s 
Tacitus  : in  append,  chronol.  a.  c.  c.  856. 


200 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  107. 


cessors,  the  illustrious  Constantine,  full  of  admiration  for  his 
genius,  and  touched  perhaps  with  some  envy  of  his  glory, 
compared  him  pleasantly  to  a wallflower,  which  clings 
for  support  to  the  stones  on  which  it  flourishes  so  luxuri- 
antly.1 2 

The  care  of  this  wise  and  liberal  ruler  extended  from  the 


harbours,  aqueducts,  and  bridges,  to  the  general  repair  of 
_ . , . . the  highways  of  the  empire.  Nor  was  it  only  as 

Trajan’s  vigi-  0 J 1 * 

lance  in  the  the  restorer  of  military  discipline  or  the  reviver 
administration  . J x 

of  the  prov-  of  the  old  tradition  of  conquest,  that  he  took  in 
charge  the  communications  which  were  originally 
designed  chiefly  for  military  purposes.3  He  was  the  great 
improver,  though  not  the  inventor,  of  the  system  of  posts 
upon  the  chief  roads,  which  formed  a striking  feature  of 
Roman  civilization  as  an  instrument  for  combining  the  re- 


motest provinces  under  a centralized  administration.3  The 
extent  to  which  the  domestic  concerns  of  every  distant 
municipium  were  subjected  to  the  prince’s  supervision  is 
curiously  pourtrayed  in  the  letters  of  Pliny,  who  appears,  as 
governor  of  Bithynia,  to  have  felt  it  incumbent  on  him  to 
consult  his  master  on  the  answer  he  should  return  to  every 
petition  of  the  provincials,  whether  they  wanted  to  construct 
an  aqueduct,  to  erect  a gymnasium,  or  to  cover  a common 
sewer.4  It  is  possible  indeed  that  the  courtly  prefect  may, 


1 Victor,  Epil.  60.:  “hie  (Constnntinus)  Trajanum  herbamparietariam,  ob 
titulos  multis  aedibus  inscriptos  appellare  solitus  erat.” 

2 The  roads  constructed  or  repaired  by  Trajan  are  carefully  enumerated  by 
Francke,  pp.  577-683. ; i.  e.  1.  on  the  northern  side  of  Italy  between  Auximum 
and  Aquileja  ; 2.  the  AppianWay;  3.  from  Beneventum  to  Brundisium  ; 4. 
various  roads  in  Spain.  They  are  for  the  most  part  ascertained  from  inscrip 
tions. 

3 Victor,  Coes.  13.:  “noscendis  ocyus  quse  ubique  e republica  gerebantur 
admota  media  publici  cursus.”  Comp.  Plin.  Epist.  x.  54,  55.  The  system  had 
been  originally  set  up  by  Augustus  (Suet.  Octav.  49.),  as  has  been  mentioned 
in  an  earlier  chapter.  The  minute  economy  of  its  administration  appears  in 
divers  letters  of  Pliny  to  Trajan,  in  which  he  excuses  himself  for  what  might 
be  considered  an  illegitimate  use  of  it,  x.  30,  31,  121,  122.  ed.  Gierig. 

4 Pkn.  Epist.  x.  21.  22.  47.  48.  57.  61.  70-73.  98.  99.  (ed.  Gierig).  We 


A.  U.  8 GO.] 


UNDER  TEE  EMPIRE. 


207 


in  this  instance,  have  been  over  obsequious,  and  Trajan  him- 
self seems  almost  to  resent  the  importunity  with  which  he 
begs  to  have  an  architect  sent  him  from  Rome.  Are  there 
no  such  artists  in  your  province  or  elsewhere?  asks  the 
emperor.  It  is  from  Greece  that  the  architects  come  to 
Rome , and  Greece  is  nearer  to  you  than  Italy } These 
works,  whether  of  convenience  or  splendour,  were,  it  seems, 
generally  constructed  by  the  governing  bodies  in  the  prov- 
inces themselves,  and  by  local  taxation,  though  assisted  not 
uncommonly  by  imperial  munificence.  Wealthy  citizens 
might  continue,  as  of  old,  thus  to  gratify  their  own  vanity, 
taste  or  generosity,  of  which  Pliny  is  himself  an  example ; 
but  the  days  of  the  splendid  magnates,  who  pretended  to 
rival  the  prince  in  their  lavish  expenditure,  had  passed  away, 
and  it  was  upon  the  master  of  the  empire  and  proprietor  of 
the  fiscus,  that  the  burden  continued  more  and  more  to 
fall.2 

While  the  chief  functionaries  of  the  state  subsided  into 
mere  agents  of  police,  the  senate  itself,  even  under  the  most 

may  be  surprised  at  the  minuteness  of  the  supervision  exercised  by  the  central 
government,  as  exemplified  in  these  records.  This  was,  however,  no  novelty  in 
the  Roman  administration,  which  under  the  free  state  was  at  least  equally 
jealous  and  exacting.  See  an  anecdote  in  Vitruvius,  i.  4.  : “in  Apulia 
oppidum  Salpia  vetus  ....  ex  quo  incolae  quotannis  segrotando  laborantes 
aliquando  pervenerunt  ad  M.  Hostilium,  eoque  publice  petentes  impetraverunt, 
uti  his  idoneum  locum  ad  mosnia  transferenda  conquireret,  eligeretque.  Tunc 
is  moratus  non  est,  sed  statim,  rationibus  doctissime  quaesitis,  secundum  mare 
mercatus  est  possessionem  loco  salubri : ab  senatuque  pop.  que  Rom.  petiit  ut 
sineret  transferre  oppidum,”  &c. 

1 Plin.  Epist.  x.  33,  34.  Whether  an  architect  was  to  be  sought  for  from 
Greece  or  Rome,  it  shows  how  small  the  class  of  intelligent  artists  must  have 
been  throughout  the  empire,  that  a province  like  Bithynia,  which  contained 
such  great  cities  as  Nicsaa  and  Nicomedia,  was  obliged  to  look  so  far  for  an 
architect.  See  the  remarks  of  Dubois-Guchan,  Tacile  et  son  Siecle,  i.  564. 

2 Pliny’s  munificence  was  on  a small  scale,  as  befitted  the  modest  position 
of  an  advocate  and  a man  of  letters.  See  an  instance  in  Ep.  iv.  1.  Licinius 
Sura,  a wealthy  and  ambitious  noble,  built  a gymnasium  for  the  Roman  people. 
A small  part  only  of  the  liberality  of  Herodes  Atticus,  of  whom  more  hereafter, 
was  bestowed  on  the  Romans.  Dion,  lxviii.  15. 


208 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  107. 


obliging  of  its  princes,  abdicated  its  duties,  and 
left  to  him  the  initiative  in  every  work  of  public  Domical  meaa- 
interest.  The  emperor  had  become  the  sole  le-  mta 
gislator,  the  sole  administrator,  the  sole  overseer  of  the  com- 
monwealth, and  at  last  he  found  himself  almost  its  sole 
benefactor  also.  A mere  selfish  voluptuary  might  neglect 
or  repudiate  this  duty,  but  a prince  of  sense  and  honoui 
acknowledged  the  obligation  of  providing,  from  the  re- 
sources placed  in  his  hands,  for  every  object  of  general 
utility.  The  endowment  of  the  professors  of  learning  by 
Vespasian  seems  to  have  been  made  from  the  fisc.  Domitian, 
in  the  midst  of  his  necessities,  had  respected  this  allocation 
of  the  imperial  treasures;  but  his  own  liberality  was  prob- 
ably confined  to  establishing  the  paltry  prizes  of  his  Capi- 
toline  and  Alban  games.  The  ordinary  largesses  of  grain 
by  which  the  citizen  of  the  lower  ranks  was  almost  wholly 
supported,  had  been  extended  by  Augustus  to  infants,  and 
the  munificence  of  successive  governments  had  added,  from 
time  to  time,  the  condiments  of  wine,  oil,  and  bacon  to  the 
produce  of  the  Egyptian  wheatfields;  but  Nerva  seems  to 
have  first  introduced  the  habit  of  providing  a 
special  endowment  in  money  for  the  children  of  ™n°^on 
the  poor,  and  more  particularly  for  orphans. 

This  prince’s  charity  was  casual  and  imperfect.  It  was  re- 
served for  Trajan  to  expand  it  into  a system,  and  establish  it 
as  an  imperial  institution.  Of  the  origin  of  this  alimentation 
there  is  no  trace.  We  can  only  imagine  the  motive  for  it  in 
the  anxiety  so  long  manifested  by  government  for  the 
increase  of  the  free  population,  and  its  wish  to  encourage 
legitimate  wedlock.1  The  provision  itself  is  recorded  on 
many  coins  of  Trajan  and  his  successors,  and  is  mentioned 
generally  by  the  historians ; but  it  is  from  the  inscribed 
tablet  of  Veleia  that  we  derive  our  full  knowledge  of  its 
extent  and  character.2  If  we  may  venture  to  apply  to  Rome 

- Plin.  Paneg.  26. : “ Hi  subsidium  bellorum,  ornamentum  pads,  publicis 
sumptibus  aluntui  ....  ex  his  castra,  ex  his  tribus  replebantur.” 

2 For  the  coins  and  inscriptions  see  Eckhel  and  Gruter.  The  tablet  referred 


A..U.  8G0.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


209 


and  to  Italy  generally  the  data  thus  acquired  with  regard  to 
one  obscure  municipium,  it  would  seem  that  there  was  a 
graduated  scale  of  endowment  for  male  and  female  children, 
for  legitimate  and  illegitimate,  sufficient  for  their  entire 
maintenance,  and  that  the  whole  number  of  recipients 
throughout  the  peninsula  might  amount  to  300, 000.1  This 
provision  was  continued  up  to  the  eighteenth  year  for  males, 
and  to  the  fourteenth  for  females.  The  number  of  boys 
thus  supported  would  seem  to  have  been  ten  times  that  of 
girls;  and  though  the  care  of  the  government  might  naturally 
be  directed  to  the  one  sex  more  than  to  the  other,  the  dis- 
proportion seems,  nevertheless,  to  point  significantly  to  the 
fact,  of  which  Ave  have  had  other  indications,  of  the  frequent 
abandonment  of  female  children.2  The  sums  by  which  this 
system  was  maintained  were  advanced  doubtless  by  the 
fiscus.  Loans  were  made  to  the  local  proprietors  for  the  cul- 
tivation or  improvement  of  their  estates,  at  the  reduced  rate 
of  five  per  cent.,  instead  of  the  twelve  per  cent.,  which  was 
ordinarily  demanded.3  The  tablet  of  Yeleia  specifies  the 

to  is  an  inscribed  plate  of  bronze,  found  in  the  neighbourhood  of  Placentia  in 
the  year  1747,  from  which  the  character  of  the  institution  has  been  deduced  by 
the  learning  and  ingenuity  of  Huratori,  Maffei,  Gori  and  Terrasson. 

1 Such  is  the  calculation  of  Erancke  ( Gesch . Trajans , p.  413.)  on  the  as- 
sumption that  the  number  relieved,  and  the  scale  of  relief  at  Yeleia  (including 
Placentia  and  Liburna),  may  be  taken  as  an  index  to  the  whole  of  Italy.  But 
for  this  we  have  not  sufficient  warrant.  On  the  contrary,  we  might  perhaps 
infer  that  the  munificence  of  Trajan  was  local  rather  than  universal,  from  the 
fact  that  Pliny  undertakes  to  establish  a fund  for  the  relief  of  his  own  towns- 
people at  Comum : Epist.  vii.  18.  In  his  Panegxjnc  (cap.  28.)  Pliny  specifies 
the  number  of  6000  infants  whom  Trajan  had  thus  endowed,  but  possibly  in 
Rome  only ; but  this  refers  to  an  early  period  in  his  reign. 

2 It  was  the  practice  of  a special  class  of  dealers  to  rear  children  deserted 
by  their  parents,  in  order  to  sell  them  as  slaves.  The  trade  was  recognized 
and  regulated  by  law,  and  many  intricate  questions  arose  from  the  claims  of 
the  parents  to  their  children  in  after  life,  See  Pliny,  Epist.  x.  74,  75.  Such 
children  were  called  “ altelli.” 

3 Such  is  the  explanation  of  Hegewisch  and  his  translator  Solvet  (Epoque 

la  plus  heureme,  &c.),  followed  by  Erancke,  and  apparently  the  true  one.  Comp. 
Dion,  Ixviiii.  6. : k at  Tcdg  tz6As<ji  ratg  iv  ’Ira/lqz  irpof  tijv  ran)  ira'iduv  rpotpyn 


210 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.D.  107, 

names  of  forty-six  sucli  proprietors,  with  the  sums  borrowed 
by  each,  and  the  security  in  land  they  offered  for  them.  If 
we  may  further  believe  that  the  emperor  engaged  not  to  call 
in  the  principal,  the  liberality  of  the  government  would 
amount  to  the  final  surrender  of  a large  capital,  on  the 
receipt  of  less  than  half  the  returns  that  might  have  been 
fairly  exacted  for  it.  The  sum  thus  raised  annually  in  the 
little  town  of  Yeleia  might  amount  to  about  400/.  of  our 
money,  which  was  not  insufficient  for  the  maintenance  of  300 
poor  children ; 1 but  if  the  above  explanation  of  the  transac- 
tion be  correct,  it  would  seem  that  the  landowners  who 
were  accommodated  on  such  easy  terms,  were  gainers  by  the 
imperial  benevolence  no  less  than  the  children  themselves. 
The  system,  whatever  was  its  real  character,  took  firm  root, 
and  was  carried  further  by  the  endowments  of  later  rulers. 
We  must  regard  it,  on  the  Avliole,  as  an  indirect  attempt  to 
make  the  provinces,  by  which  the  fiscus  was  supplied,  con- 
tribute to  the  support  of  Italy.  Of  the  various  modes  by 
which  this  end  had  been  sought,  the  alimentation  of  Trajan 
was  the  most  specious;  but  it  was  not  less  really  the  exaction 
of  a tribute,  such  as  Italy,  in  her  days  of  conquest,  had  been 
wont  to  demand  openly ; but  in  those  days  she  gave  at  least 
her  own  blood  in  exchange  for  the  gold  of  the  provincials; 
now  she  had  ceased  even  to  recruit  the  legions. 

The  legislation,  indeed,  of  this  popular  emperor  is  marked 
generally  by  a special  consideration  for  Italian  interests ; and 
this  circumstance  is  to  be  borne  in  mind,  when 

Measures  for  . 

the  special  ben-  we  remark  the  acclamations  with  winch  he  was 
iuiy.  greeted  by  Pliny,  the  mouth-piece  of  the  nobility, 
and  the  favour  in  which  he  was  held  by  the  later  generations, 

iro/Eld  xapiGdaQai,  nai  toIjtoic  evepyerav.  That  the  endowment  was  derived, 
not  from  a tax  on  the  proprietors,  but  in  a certain  sense  from  the  imperial 
treasury,  appears  from  Pliny’s  phrase  “ alimenta  de  tuo ; ” and  this  may  be 
reconciled  with  the  “ publico  sumptu  ” of  the  inscriptions  by  reference  to  the 
fiscus,  the  private  treasure  of  the  emperor  derived  from  public  sources. 

1 See  Tranche's  calculations,  p.  412. ; on  the  supposition  that  specie  was 
worth  ten  times  its  present  value. 


A.U.  860.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


211 


who  referred  no  doubt  to  the  testimony  of  this  class  only. 
Even  Trajan’s  wide  experience,  his  acquaintance  and  personal 
connexion  with  the  provinces,  failed  in  expanding  his  views 
to  the  conception  of  himself  as  sovereign  of  the  whole  em- 
pire. He  was  still  the  emperor  of  the  Romans,  perhaps,  in 
this  sense,  the  last  emperor  of  the  Romans.  While  the 
world  was  rapidly  assimilating  itself  to  a single  type,  and 
imbibing  the  idea  of  its  common  interests,  he  fixed  his  mind 
on  the  narrow  notions  of  the  past,  and  tried  to  perpetuate 
the  selfish  principle  of  monopoly  and  conquest.  His  meagre 
and  futile  attempts,  indeed,  to  maintain  the  old  Italian  or 
Roman  policy,  show  how  vain  Avas  now  the  endeavour  to 
prop  the  prosperity  of  one  section  of  the  empire  by  the 
sacrifice  of  the  rest,  even  though  that  section  Avas  the  sacred 
soil  of  Italy  herself.  The  attempt  to  attach  the  wealth  of 
the  world  to  a single  spot,  by  requiring  the  candidates  for 
public  office  to  hold  one  third  of  their  landed  property  in 
Italy,  was  a futile  recurrence  to  obsolete  notions  unsuited  to 
the  genius  of  the  times.1  The  relaxations  Trajan  introduced 
into  the  tax  on  successions,  to  which,  since  the  time  of  Au- 
gustus, the  Romans  had  fully  reconciled  themselves,  were 
designed  as  an  encouragement  to  undertake  citizenship,  a 
boon  which  was  felt  at  this  period  to  be  of  doubtful  value, 
but  about  which,  as  a military  ruler,  he  was  doubly  anxious. 
The  measures  by  which  he  secured  a constant  supply  of 
grain  from  the  provinces,  exempting  its  exportation  from  all 
duties,  and  stimulating  the  growers  at  one  extremity  of  the 
empire  to  relieve  the  deficiencies  of  another,  were  directed  to 
the  maintenance  of  abundance  in  Rome  and  Italy.  Thus  on 
the  casual  failure  of  the  harvest  in  Egypt,  her  empty  grana 

1 Plin.  Epist.  vi.  19. : “ patrimonii  tertiam  partem  conferre  jussit  in  ea  quae 
solo  continerentur,  deforme  arbitratus,  ut  erat,  honorem  peiiiuros  urbem  Itali- 
amque,  non  pro  patria  sed  pro  hospitio  aut  stabulo,  quasi  peregrinantes,  habere.” 
This  enactment  was,  in  strictness,  limited  to  the  candidates  for  magistracies. 
The  proportion  was  relaxed  to  a fourth  part  by  the  emperor  Antoninus. 
Capitol  in  Anton.  11. 


212 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  1).  107. 


ries  were  for  once  replenished  from  the  superfluous  stores  of 
Gaul,  Spain,  or  Africa.1 2 

In  other  particulars  also  which  interested  the  feelings  of 
the  senatorial  class,  Trajan  recurred  to  the  principles  of 
ancient  usage.  He  refrained  from  demanding  the  consulship 
annually,  and  held  the  chief  magistracy  five  times  only 
during  his  possession  of  power.  Whether  in  the  curule 
chair,  or  on  the  benches  of  the  senators,  he  was  equally 
moderate  in  language  and  demeanor,  recalling  to  the  minds 
of  his  delighted  colleagues  the  days  of  republican  equality. 
I1  his  is  no  lord , exclaimed  Martial;  this  is  an  emperor , and 
the  most  just  of  senators.  Y~ou  command  us  to  be  free , adds 
Measures  for  Pliny;  we  will  be  freed  He  studied  to  enhance 
Sghityof'the6  the*1'  self-respect,  by  scrupulously  abstaining 
senate.  from  dictating  their  election  to  offices.  If  ever 

he  presumed  to  solicit  their  suffrages  in  favour  of  a friend, 
his  obsequious  manner  was  felt  as  a compliment  not  less  per- 
suasive than  a command.  Did  this  unaccustomed  freedom 
of  election  increase  the  ardour  of  competition,  he  provided 
against  its  abuse  by  fresh  enactments  against  bribery;  he 
protected  the  true  dignity  of  the  fathers,  by  revoking  the 
indulgence  formerly  allowed  of  voting  by  secret  ballot.3 
The  well-known  passage  in  which  Pliny  hails  the  return  of 

1 Plin.  Paneg.  29-32. : “ percrebuerat  antiquitus  urbem  nostram  nisi  opibus 
iEgypti  ali  non  posse.  Superbiebat  vetosa  et  insolens  natio.  . . . Refudimus 
Nilo  suas  copias  . . . discat  igitur  iEgyptus  non  alimenta  se  nobis  sed  tributa 

praestare Actum  erat  de  fecundissima  gente  si  libera  fuisset ; pudebat 

sterilitatis  insolitse  . . . cum  pariter  a te  necessitatibus  ejus  pudorique  subven- 
tum  est.” 

2 Martial,  x.  72. : 

“ Non  est  hie  dominus  sed  imperator, 

Sed  justissimus  omnium  senator.” 

Pliny,  Paneg.  56. : “jubes  esse  liberos ; erimus.”  In  this  speech  riiny 
repeatedly  contrasts  the  titles  of  “dominus”  and  “princeps.”  When,  in  his 
letters  from  Bithynia,  he  addresses  Trajan  as  “dominus,”  he  speaks  as  a mili 
fcary  officer  to  his  chief.  But  the  word  was  already  used  as  a courteous  saluta 
tion  to  a superior. 

3 Plin.  Epist.  vi.  19.,  iii.  20. 


A.  IT.  860.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


213 


the  golden  age  of  publicity,  is  a valuable  testimony  to  the 
gentlemanlike  spirit  common,  we  may  believe,  to  his  class. 

Trajan  too  had  pledged  himself  never  to  take  the  life  of  a 
senator,  and  his  courage  was  equal  to  such  self-denial.  Thus, 
when  he  was  privily  informed  that  Licinius  Sura, 

...  . ...  , Trajan’s  cmir- 

oue  of  the  most  illustrious  of  the  order,  was  con-  age  andseif- 

spiring  against  him,  he  replied  by  allowing  Sura’s 

surgeon  to  anoint  his  eyes,  and  employing  his  barber  to 

shave  him.  Mad  my  friend  conceived  designs  against  me , 

he  said  next  day,  he  might  have  had  his  ivish  yesterday. 

But  all  those  about  him  were  not  equally  innocent.  Cal- 

purnius  Crassus,  the  same  Avliorn  ISTerva  had  pardoned,  laid  a 

plan  for  assassinating  him.  Trajan,  though  he  could  not 

exonerate  the  culprit,  disdained  to  take  cognisance  of  the 

crime,  and  left  to  the  senate  the  inquiry  and  the  sentence. 

Thus  it  was  that  Crassus  suffered  death  at  the  hands  of  his 

own  colleagues,  who  accepted  the  responsibility  of  an  act 

which  seemed  necessary  for  their  hero’s  safety.1 

If  the  nobles  enjoyed  under  Trajan  all  the  liberty  they 
desired,  and  at  least  as  much  as  they  could  use  to  general 
advantage,  they  were  gratified,  moreover,  by  the  Trai-an,s  ,eal_ 
jealousy  with  which  their  ruler  controlled  the  anTtradf  com- 
classes  beneath  them.  The  privileged  orders  at  binatious- 
Rome,  as  elsewhere,  regarded  with  apprehension  the  power 
of  combination  possessed  by  the  traders,  the  artizans,  the 
shopkeepers  of  the  city,  whose  more  active  cupidity  was 
always  accumulating  wealth,  and  whose  ambition  prompted 
them  to  tread  too  closely  on  the  heels  of  their  proud  and  list- 
less superiors.  Hence  the  anxiety  of  the  senate  and  magis- 
trates, even  under  the,  free  state,  to  repress  the  union  of  the 
lower  classes,  whether  in  the  shape  of  guilds,  of  clubs,  or  of 
any  other  co-operative  societies.  The  danger  was  really  a 
social  one ; but  it  was  the  policy  of  the  government  to  rep- 
resent it  as  political ; and  the  shrewdest  of  the  emperors 

1 Dion,  Ixviii.  15.  Comp.  Eutrop.  viii.  2. : “ut  omni  ejus  astate  unus  Sena* 
tor  damnatus  sit,  atque  is  tamen  per  Senatum  ignorante  Trajano.” 


214 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  107. 


noff  found  it  his  interest  to  humour  these  apprehensions,  and 
to  affect  a rooted  antipathy  to  all  social  combinations.  The 
political  character  he  attributes  to  them  appears  in  the  word 
factions , by  which  he  describes  them.  The  horror  Trajan 
affected,  or  really  felt,  in  regard  to  them  extended  into  the 
provinces.  When  Pliny,  as  prefect  of  Bithynia,  proposed  to 
enz  ol  an  association  of  workmen  at  Nicomedia  for  the  speed- 
ier extinction  of  fires,  he  feels  it  necessary  not  only  to  con- 
sult the  emperor  on  the  subject,  but  to  explain  the  precautions 
he  would  take  to  prevent  abuse.  Trajan  absolutely  rejects 
the  proposal,  declaring  that  no  precautions  can  avail  to  pre- 
vent such  associations  degenerating  into  dangerous  con- 


spiracies.1 

But  though  Trajan’s  mind  did  not  rise  to  wide  and  liberal 
views  for  the  advantage  of  the  provinces,  he  neglected  no 
favourable  opportunity  for  the  benefit  of  particu- 

Trajan’s  ad-  . 1 A J * 

ministration  lar  localities.  His  ears  were  always  open  to  the 

combines  . . . 

splendour  with  suggestions  ol  his  prelects,  and  the  petitions  ol 

economy.  . . , . . 1 . 

his  subjects.  His  hand  was  open  to  bestow  en- 
dowments and  largesses,  to  relieve  public  calamities,  to 
increase  public  enjoyments,  to  repair  the  ravages  of  earth- 
quakes and  tempests,  to  construct  roads  and  canals,  theatres 
and  aqueducts.  The  activity  displayed  throughout  the  em- 
pire in  works  of  this  unproductive  nature,  shows  a great 
command  of  money,  an  abundant  currency,  easy  means  of 
transacting  business,  amjfie  resources  of  labour,  and  well-de- 
vised schemes  for  combining  and  unfolding  them.  Through- 
out a reign  of  nineteen  years  Trajan  was  enabled  to  abstain 
from  any  new  and  oppressive  taxation,  while  he  refrained, 
with  scrupulous  good  faith,  from  the  alternative  of  confisca- 
tion and  proscription.  He  was  ashamed  of  his  predecessors’ 
accumulations,  of  their  houses  and  estates,  their  ornaments 
and  furniture,  extorted  from  the  fears  of  their  miserable  sub- 


1 Plin.  Epist.  x.  33,  36. : “ quodcunque  nomen  ex  quacunque  causa  dederi- 
mus  iis,  qui  in  idem  contracti  fuerint,  hetmriae,  quamvis  brevis,  Sent.”  He  goes 
on  to  recommend  the  householders  to  provide  means  for  their  own  protection 
against  fire,  “ ac,  si  res  poposcerit  accursu  populi  ad  hoc  uti.” 


A.  U.  860.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


215 


jects,  offered  during  life  as  bribes  for  tbeir  favour,  or  servilely 
bequeathed  on  deathbeds.  He  made  a noble  sacrifice  of 
these  ill-gotten  riches,  either  casting  them  to  his  friends,  or 
devoting  the  produce  of  their  sale  to  works  of  utility  and 
grandeur.1  Under  Trajan’s  admirable  administration  judi- 
cious economy  went  ever  hand  in  hand  with  genuine  magni- 
ficence. 

The  monuments  of  Roman  jurisprudence  contain  many 
examples  of  Trajan’s  legislation.  The  Replies  he  addressed 
Trajan’s  ie-is-  to  the  unceasing  questions  of  his  prefects  and 
lation.  magistrates,  were  incorporated  in  the  laws  of  the 

empire,  and  retained  their  force  for  many  generations.  The 
subjects,  however,  to  which  they  relate  are  of  minor  interest, 
and  illustrate  no  general  principle  to  recommend  them  to  the 
notice  of  historical  students.2  The  legislator  qualified  him- 
self for  the  task  of  propounding  or  applying  legal  principles, 
by  assiduous  labour  in  the  administration  of  existing  law. 
Trajan  exchanged  the  toils  of  war  for  the  labours  of  the 
forum.  Like  the  great  statesmen  of  the  republic,  he  returned 
from  the  camp  to  the  city  to  take  his  seat  daily  on  the  tribu- 
nals, with  the  ablest  judges  for  his  assessors;  he  heard  appeals 
from  the  highest  courts  throughout  his  dominions,  and  the 
final  sentence  he  pronounced  assumed  the  validity  of  a legal 
enactment.  The  clemency  of  Trajan  was  as  conspicuous  as 
his  love  of  justice,  and  to  him  is  ascribed  the  noble  sentiment 
that  it  is  better  that  the  guilty  should  escape  than  the  inno- 
cent suffer.3  It  was  also  a refinement  in  flattery,  not  unconi- 

1 Plin.  Paneg.  50,  51.  This  writer  is  extravagant  in  his  encomiums  on 
the  alleviation  by  Trajan  of  the  legacy  duty  (vicesima  haereditatum)  paid  by 
Roman  citizens.  The  class  that  profited  by  it  was  small,  but  they  were  Roman 
citizens,  and  the  remission  was  made  by  the  fisc.  Plin.  Paneg.  3 T. 

2 See  the  enumeration  of  Senatusconsulta,  edicts,  rescripts,  &e.,  of  Trajan 
from  the  Digest  and  other  sources  in  Francke’s  careful  work.  Such  as  related 
*o  questions  between  patrons  and  clients  or  freedmen,  seem  to  have  been  con- 
ceived in  the  interests  of  the  former  class.  Comp.  Plin.  Ep.  x.  4. : Martial, 
x.  34. 

3 Digest.  xlviiL  19.  5. : “ Satius  esse  impunitum  relinqui  facinus  nocentia 
quam  innocentem  damnare.” 


216 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  107. 


monly  adopted,  to  request  the  emperor  to  undertake  the 
hearing  in  the  first  instance.  Such  was  the  case  with  the 
three  trials  which  Pliny  describes  in  one  of  his  letters,  when 
Trajan  summoned  him  to  his  residence  at  Centuoiccllae. 
What  more  delightf  ul , he  exclaims,  than  to  witness  the  prince's 
justice , gravity , and  courtesy , even  in  his  private  retirement , 
whore  his  virtues  are  generally  hidden  from  the  public  gaze  ? 
The  first  was  the  case  of  Claudius  Aristo,  a provincial  mag- 
nate, who  pleaded  pig  own  cause  triumphantly  against  a 
calumnious  imputation  of  treason.  The  second  was  a charge 
of  adultery  committed  with  a centurion  by  the  wife  of  a mili- 
tary tribune.  The  husband  had  laid  his  grievance  before  the 
legatus,  but  the  provincial  magistrate  had  referred  it  to  the 
imperator,  as  a matter  of  camp  discipline,  and  Trajan  took 
care,  in  giving  judgment,  to  let  it  be  understood  that  it  was 
only  as  between  soldiers  that  he  took  cognisance  of  it.  The 
third  was  a complaint  of  the  presumptive  heirs  to  a property 
against  the  claimants  under  the  will.  They  had  addressed 
themselves  to  the  emperor  while  he  was  absent  in  Dacia,  and 
he  appointed  a day  for  the  hearing  on  his  return.  One  of  the 
defendants  was  a freedman  of  the  imperial  household,  and 
when  the  plaintiffs,  who  apparently  had  no  real  case,  pre- 
tended that  they  dared  not  enforce  their  claim  against  a 
favourite  of  the  emperor’s,  Trajan  magnanimously  replied, 
that  Eurhythmus  was  not  a Polycletus,  nor  was  he  a ISTero.1 
It  is  clear  that,  whatever  might  be  the  legitimate  mode  of 
procedure,  the  first  of  these  cases  was  referred  to  the  emperor 
as  a matter  specially  affecting  his  prerogative  as  chief  of  the 
state ; the  second,  as  has  been  said,  because  it  related  to  the 
discipline  of  the  army;  and  the  third,  from  the  peculiar 
claims  which  a freedman  of  the  palace  might  be  supposed  to 
have  on  the  prince’s  interest. 

The  justice,  the  modesty,  the  unwearied  application  of 
Trajan,  were  deservedly  celebrated,  no  less  than  his  valour  ir: 


1 Plin.  Epist.  vi.  SI. 


A.U.  860.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


217 


war,  and  his  conduct  in  political  affairs;  but  a Trajan,B 
great  part  of  his  amazing  popularity  was  owing,  sonal  0U3-luioB- 
no  doubt,  to  his  genial  demeanour,  and  to  the  affection 
inspired  by  his  qualities  as  a friend  and  associate.  The  im- 
portance which  the  Romans  attached  to  the  personal  charac- 
ter of  their  eminent  men,  has  generally  filled  their  biogra- 
phies with  anecdotes  of  their  private  life.  The  prominence 
given  by  the  establishment  of  monarchy  to  the  man  who 
occupied  the  highest  place  among  them,  brought  this  ten- 
dency into  still  stronger  relief.  It  is  to  be  regretted,  how- 
ever, that  with  the  exception  of  his  next  predecessor,  Trajan 
is  the  only  emperor  of  whom  there  survives  no  such  special 
monograph.  Our  account  of  his  exploits,  his  fortune  and  his 
character,  must  be  taken  from  the  epitome  of  Dion’s  slight 
history,  or  pieced  imperfectly  together,  from  the  Panegyric 
of  Pliny,  and  the  surer,  but  still  more  meagre  evidence  of 
coins  and  monuments.  The  trifling  notices  in  the  compendi- 
ous works  of  Victor  or  Eutropius  may  confirm  what  we  have 
gleaned  from  these  sources,  but  hardly  add  another  fact  to  it. 
Nevertheless,  Trajan  possesses  an  advantage  over  the  other 
emperors,  in  the  remains  still  existing  of  his  correspondence 
in  the  letters  of  Pliny,  which  bring  out  not  only  the  manners 
of  the  times,  but  in  some  degree  the  character  of  the  prince 
also,  and  bear  ample  testimony  to  his  minute  vigilance  and 
unwearied  application,  his  anxiety  for  his  subjects’  well-being, 
the  ease  with  which  he  conducted  his  intercourse  with  his 
friends,  and  the  ease  with  which  he  inspired  them  in  return.1 
Trajan’s  letters  bespeak  the  polished  gentleman  no  less  than 
the  statesman.  Such  too  is  the  common  tenour  of  all  our 
evidence  on  this  head.  Trajan  was  fond  of  society,  and  of 
educated  and  even  literary  society.  He  was  proud  of  being 

1 We  are  struck  in  perusing  this  correspondence  with  the  apparent  absence 
it  betrays  of  general  principles  of  government.  In  every  emergency  the  prefect 
puts  a direct  question  to  the  emperor.  The  emperor  replies  with  a special 
answer.  The  brevity,  point,  and  vigour  of  his  replies  bespeak  his  sense  and 
judgment.  The  last  letter  of  the  series,  in  which  he  grants  a favour  to  his 
correspondent,  is  a graceful  instance  of  his  courtesy  as  well  as  his  kindness. 

125 


218 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.D.  107. 


known  to  associate  with  tlie  learned,  and  felt  himself  compli- 
mented when  he  bestowed  on  the  rhetorician  Dion  the  com- 
pliment of  carrying  him  in  his  own  chariot.1 2  That  such 
refinement  of  taste  was  not  incompatible  with  excess  in  the 
indulgences  of  the  table,  was  the  fault  of  the  times,  and 
more  particularly,  perhaps,  of  the  habits  of  camp  life,  to 
which  he  had  been  so  much  accustomed.  Intemperance  was 
always  a Roman  vice,  and  though  Augustus  might  be  re- 
markable for  his  sobriety,  it  would  be  wrong  to  infer  from 
the  examples  of  ISTerva,  Trajan,  and  his  next  successor, 
Hadrian,  that  the  leaders  of  society  at  Rome  had  degenerated 
in  the  second  century  from  those  of  the  first,  and  of  ages  still 
earlier.  Sulla  and  Cato  the  Censor,  Julius  Caesar  and  Anto- 
nius,  were  free  livers  in  all  respects,  and  only  less  notorious 
for  their  excesses  at  table  than  Tiberius  and  Claudius,  inas- 
much as  the  greatness  of  their  general  character  over- 
shadowed their  littleness.3 

The  affability  of  the  prince,  and  the  freedom  with  which 
he  exchanged  with  his  nobles  all  the  offices  of  ordinary 
T fi  courtesy  and  hospitality,  bathing,  supping,  or 
and  count?-  hunting  as  an  equal  in  their  company,  constituted 
one  of  his  greatest  charms  in  the  eyes  of  a jeal- 
ous patriciate  which  had  seen  its  masters  too  often  engrossed 
by  the  flatteries  of  freedmen,  and  still  viler  associates.  But 
Trajan  enjoyed  also  the  distinction,  dear  in  Roman  eyes,  of 
a fine  figure  and  a noble  countenance.  In  stature  he  exceed- 
ed the  common  height,  and  on  public  occasions,  when  he 

1 Philostr.  Vit.  Sophist,  i.  7. : rt  /ikv  Myeig  ovic  ol6a,  6k  ere  ug  ipavr&v. 
Comp.  Themist.  Oral.  v.  on  the  philosophers  patronized  by  the  emperors. 

2 For  the  evidence  of  Trajan’s  intemperance  see  Dion,  lxviii.  7. ; Victor, 

Cces.  13. ; Epit.  13,  48. ; Spartian.  Hadr.  3. ; Lamprid.  Alex.  Sev.  39. ; Julian. 
Ccesar,  p.  23. ; and  comp.  Francke,  Gcsch.  Trajans , p.  664. : “ Wie  an  Philipp 
von  Macedonien  und  seinem  Adel,  an  Alexander  M.  und  seiner  Generalen,  die 
Uebsrtreibung  des  Genusses  bei  Bachanalien  geriigt  wird,  soil  Trajan,  wie 
Nerva,  Hadrian  und  andere  Zeitgenossen,  einen  frohlichen  Trunk  geliebt  haben.” 
The  habits  of  Philip  and  Alexander  were  those  of  semi-barbarians  contrasted 
with  the  polished  self-restraint  of  the  Greeks,  but  the  Romans  had  never 
adopted  the  Grecian  polish  in  this  particular. 


A.  U.  8CJ0.J 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


219 


loved  to  walk  bareheaded  in  the  midst  of  the  senators,  his 
grey  hairs  gleamed  conspicuously  above  the  crowd.  His 
features,  as  we  may  trace  them  unmistakably  on  his  innu- 
merable busts  and  medals,  were  regular,  and  his  face  was  the 
last  of  the  imperial  series  that  retained  the  true  Roman  type, 
not  in  the  aquiline  nose  only,  but  in  the  broad  and  low  fore- 
head, the  angular  chin,  the  firm  compressed  lips,  and  gener- 
ally in  the  stern  compactness  of  its  structure.1  The  thick 
and  straight-cut  hair,  smoothed  over  the  brow  without  a curl 
or  a parting,  marks  the  simplicity  of  the  man’s  character,  in 
a voluptuous  age  which  delighted  in  the  culture  of  flowing 
or  frizzled  locks.  But  the  most  interesting  characteristic  of 
the  figure  I have  so  vividly  before  me,  is  the  look  of  painful 
thought,  which  seems  to  indicate  a constant  sense  of  over- 
whelming responsibilities,  honourably  felt  and  bravely  borne, 
yet,  notwithstanding  much  assumed  cheerfulness  and  self- 
abandonment,  ever  irritating  the  nerves,  and  weighing  upon 
the  conscience. 

The  history  of  Trajan’s  reign  is  now  brought  down  to  the 
moment  of  his  last  departure  from  the  city.  A short  interval 
of  Eastern  warfare  still  remains  between  this  epoch  and  his 
death ; but  the  incidents  of  his  latter  years  belong  to  another 
connexion  of  events,  and  it  will  be  convenient  here  to  close 
the  summary  of  his  conduct  and  character. 

1 Winckelmann  has  observed  that  generally  in  the  busts  of  Roman  emperors 
the  lips  are  closed,  indicating  peculiar  reserve  and  dignity,  free  from  human 
passions  and  emotions.  A similar  feeling  may  be  traced  in  the  earliest  Greek 
statues,  but  it  was  not  retained  even  by  the  Greeks  in  their  representation  of 
divinities.  So  a statue  of  Apollo  is  described  by  Propertius  (ii.  23.) : 

“ Hie  equidem  Phoebo  visus  mihi  pulchrior  ipso 
Marmoreus  tacita  carmen  hiare  lyra.” 


220 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


CHAPTER  LXIY. 


EFFECT  OF  THE  FLAVIAN  REACTION  ON  ROMAN  LITERATURE. — COMPARISON  Off 
LUCAN  AND  SILIUS  ITALICUS  : OF  SENECA  AND  QUINTILIAN. — PLINY  THE 
NATURALIST. — SCHOLASTIC  TRAINING. — JUVENAL  COMPARED  WITH  PERSIUS  : 
STATIUS  WITH  OVID  : MARTIAL  WITH  HORACE. — THE  HISTORIANS  I TACITUS : 
INGENUITY  OF  HIS  PLAN. HIS  PREJUDICES  AND  MISREPRESENTATIONS. PREVA- 
LENCE OF  BIOGRAPHY. TACITUS  AND  SUETONIUS. UNCRITICAL  SPIRIT  OF 

HISTORICAL  COMPOSITION. — MEMOIRS  AND  CORRESPONDENCE. — PLINY  THE 

YOUNGER. INTEREST  ATTACHING  TO  HIS  LETTERS. MUTUAL  APPROXIMATION 

OF  THE  PHILOSOPHICAL  SECTS. PREVALENCE  OF  SUICIDE. CORELLIUS. — SILIUS. 

ARRIA. CORRUPTION  OF  SOCIETY. MILITARY  MANNERS. LIFE  AMONG  THE 

INTELLIGENT  NOBLES. SPURINNA. PLINY  THE  ELDER. PLINY  THE  YOUNGER. 

VILLAS  OF  THE  NOBILITY. THE  LAURENTINE  AND  TUSCAN  OF  PLINY. — THE 

SURRENTINE  OF  POLLIUS. — DECLINE  OF  MASCULINE  CHARACTER  AMONG  THE 
ROMANS. — EXCEPTIONS. — TACITUS  AND  JUVENAL  MASCULINE  WRITERS. — CON- 
TRAST IN  THEIR  TEMPERS. — LAST  CHAMPIONS  OF  ROMAN  IDEAS. 

OUR  latest  chapters  have  supplied  a narrative  of  political 
events,  illustrated  by  personal  anecdotes,  and  by  such 
accounts  of  the  monuments  of  the  age  as  might 

Moral  aspect  of  . . Jr 

the  Flavian  re-  serve  to  animate  and  explain  it.  We  may  now, 
in  turn,  devote  a special  section  to  the  moral  as- 
pect of  Roman  society  during  the  period  thus  reviewed,  the 
reigns,  namely,  of  Vespasian  and  his  two  sons,  of  Nerva  and 
of  Trajan;  and,  in  so  doing,  we  must  observe  again  how 
strongly  the  Flavian  period  is  marked  by  the  reaction  from 
the  spirit  of  the  Claudian  empire.  The  establishment  of  the 
monarchy  had  kindled,  as  we  have  seen,  the  imagination  of 
the  Romans.  Hard,  selfish,  prosaic  as  they  naturally  were, 
they  had  been  roused  to  enthusiasm  by  the  greatness  of 
Julius,  the  fortune  of  Augustus,  the  wild  magnificence  of 
Caius,  the  grace  and  accomplishments  of  Nero.  In  their 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


221 


fond  admiration  of  the  glorious  objects  thus  presented  to 
them,  they  had  invested  the  men  themselves  with  the  attri- 
butes of  divinity,  their  government  with  a halo  of  immortality. 
They  were  persuaded  that  the  empire  itself,  under  the  rule 
of  this  celestial  dynasty,  was  an  effluence  from  the  divine 
regimen  of  the  world ; and  they  consented  to  regard  the 
freaks  of  caprice  and  madness  from  which,  as  from  the  dis- 
turbances of  the  elements,  they  occasionally  suffered,  as  mys- 
terious but  perhaps  necessary  evils.1  Meanwhile  they  rev- 
elled without  stint  or  misgiving  in  luxury,  extravagance, 
and  every  vicious  indulgence,  bio  shade  of  apprehension  for 
the  future  had  yet  passed  over  the  festivals  and  orgies  in 
which  wealth  and  greatness  rioted  among  them.  The  eter- 
nity of  Rome,  and  the  immutability  of  her  fortunes,  were 
supposed  to  be  established  in  the  decrees  of  fate.  Her  uni- 
versal empire  was  the  theme  of  poets  and  declaimers ; and 
the  idea  that  the  Latian  Jupiter  was  the  Lord  of  all  the 
world,  which  he  held  as  it  were  in  trust  for  the  children  of 
Romulus,  was  impressed  without  doubt  or  question  on  the 
minds  of  her  exulting  citizens. 

The  monstrous  follies  of  Hero’s  latter  years  had,  doubt- 
less, more  effect  in  unsealing  men’s  eyes  than  his  cruelties  or 
extortions.  His  dancing  and  singing  revolted 

. . . Extinction  of 

them  prejudices  more  than  his  proscriptions  and  the  cesarean 

„ . . -i  i t i . enthusiasm. 

confiscations.  JLheir  god  had  at  last  made  him- 
self contemptible,  and  the  petulance  which  rebuked  the  wor- 
shippers of  leeks  and  crocodiles  in  Egypt,  was  startled  in  its 
turn  by  the  vileness  of  the  human  idol  which  it  condescended 
itself  to  worship,  nevertheless,  in  the  absence  of  any  for- 
eign opinion  which  could  act  upon  the  sentiments  of  the  Ro- 
mans, it  might  have  been  long  before  this  surprise  or  shame 
was  roused  to  action.  Even  Hero’s  frivolities  would  never, 

1 Lucan,  Pharsal.  i.  37. : “ Scelera  ipsa  nefasque  Hac  mercede  placent.” 
The  Romans  had  doubtless  applied  to  then-  own  case  the  same  reasoning  which 
they  addressed  to  their  subjects  : “quomodo  sterilitatem  aut  nimios  imbres,  et 
csetera  naturae  mala,  ita  lusum  vel  avaritiam  dominantium  tolerate.”  Tac. 
Hist.  iv.  74. 


222 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


perhaps,  have  been  resented  in  arms  by  the  senate,  nor  by 
the  classes  whose  feelings  the  senate  represented,  had  not  the 
blow  been  first  struck  from  the  camps  in  the  provinces,  with- 
in which  all  the  vigour,  and  most  of  the  prejudices,  of  old 
Rome  had  taken  refuge.  The  conviction  which  flashed  upon 
the  world  from  Galba’s  Spanish  leaguer,  that  a prince  could 
be  created  elsewhere  than  at  Rome,  was  in  itself  a revolu- 
tion. The  ripening  tradition  of  a hundred  years  was  in  an 
instant  blighted.  The  quick  succession  of  pretenders  each 
clothing  himself  for  a moment  in  the  purple,  and  passing 
swiftly  across  the  stage,  dissipated  what  remained  of  the 
Caesarean  enthusiasm.  Yespasian  succeeded  to  a realm  weary 
of  illusion  and  disposed  to  obedience. 

The  blindness  of  this  obedience  may  be  estimated  from 
the  ease  with  which  men  conformed  to  the  example  of  their 
Effect  of  this  new  ruler’s  antique  and  homely  character.  The 
tone^of  Roman  virtues  of  the  founder  of  the  Flavian  dynas- 

literature.  tv  exposed  more  strongly  than  ever  the  tinsel 
brilliancy  of  N ero.  The  sobered  feeling  of  the  age  is  vividly 
impressed  on  the  remains  of  its  literature.  The  writings  of 
Comparison  of  Flavian  period  present  little  of  the  lawless 
Eiavianwr^  force  and  feverish  extravagance  which  so  gener- 
ters-  ally  mark  the  Claudian.  The  enthusiasm  of  the 

Romans  had  been  quelled.  Their  compositions  are  now  sub- 
jected to  more  careful  revision;  they  aim  at  exactness  and 
completeness ; they  study  artistic  development.  They  ex- 
hibit the  results  of  a conscious  self-command,  and  already 
betray  the  effects  of  the  new  system  of  academic  training 
disseminated  through  the  schools  by  Yespasian.  The  contrast 
between  the  style  of  the  two  eras,  so  little  removed  in  time, 
but  so  widely  separated  in  ideas  and  sentiments,  may  be 
illustrated  by  a comparison  of  parallel  writers.  Thus,  for 
Lucan  and  sn-  instance,  we  may  set  Lucan  side  by  side  with 
lus  itaiicus.  Silius  Italicus.  Both  were  men  of  affluence  and 
noble  birth ; both  well  versed  in  the  liberal  knowledge  of 
their  time  ; both  familiar  with  the  court,  the  one  with  that 
of  Nero,  the  other  with  that  of  the  Flavian  emperors,  and 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


223 


with  the  high-bred  society  that  flitted  through  it.  Their 
fortunes,  indeed,  were  in  the  end  widely  different.  The  death 
of  the  one  was  precipitated  by  his  own  uncontrolled  but 
generous  impetuosity,  while  Silius  cultivated  patience  under 
the  sway  of  emperors,  bad  and  good,  indifferently,  lived  in 
safety  to  a ripe  old  age,  in  the  enjoyment  of  every  civil  hon- 
our, and  at  last  perished  by  his  own  act  and  will,  when  sated 
with  life,  and  harassed  by  an  incurable  malady,  he  resolved 
to  finish  his  career  by  abstinence,  and  resisted  the  dissuasions 
of  his  friends  through  the  long-protracted  agony  of  a the- 
atrical exit.1  Both  devoted  themselves  to  poetical  composi- 
tion, and  exulted  in  the  applause  of  their  contemporaries  not 
less  than  in  the  hopes  of  an  enduring  reputation.2  They 
shared  a kindred  taste,  also,  in  their  choice  of  themes ; for 
both  made  the  rare  selection  of  a national  event  for  the  sub- 
ject of  an  epic,  and  both  entered  on  their  tasks  in  the  spirit 
of  rhetoricians  rather  than  of  poets.  But  their  mode  of  exe- 
cution was  widely  different.  Lucan,  with  less  imagination 
and  less  invention  than  any  one  perhaps  of  the  great  masters 
of  epic  song,  is  the  most  independent  and  self-sufficing  of 
them  all.  He  displays  throughout  a daring  disregard  for 
precedent  and  authority.  He  venerates  no  master;  he  fol- 
lows no  model ; he  had  never  studied,  one  is  almost  tempted 
to  imagine  that  he  had  never  read,  Virgil.  He  seems  hardly 
to  look  forward  from  one  of  his  cantos  to  another,  exhibits 
no  unity  of  purpose,  sets  forth  no  moral,  proposes  to  us  no 
hero.  Nevertheless,  in  spite  of  this  defiance  of  all  rules  and 
traditions,  he  succeeds,  by  the  mere  force  of  vehemence  and 
audacity,  in  persuading  us  to  admit  him  within  the  hallowed 

1 Silius  was  actually  a little  the  elder  of  the  two  : but  Lucan  died  a.  d.  65 
at  the  age  of  twenty-six  ; Silius  was  living  nearly  forty  years  later,  and  com 
posed  his  poem  under  Domitian,  at  least  twenty  years  after  the  date  of  the 
Pharsalia. 

2 The  contemporary  reputation  enjoyed  by  Lucan  is  shown  by  the  well- 
known  line  of  Juvenal,  Sat.  vii.  T9. : “ Contentus  fama  jaceat  Lucanus  in  liortis 
Marmoreis.”  The  estimation  in  which  Silius  was  held,  may  be  judged  from 
several  compliments  paid  him  by  Martial  and  Pliny. 


224 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROHAHS 


circle  of  the  master  spirits  of  poetry.  Silius,  on  the  contrary, 
creeps,  while  Lucan  bounds,  and  almost  flies.  Silius  writes 
with  all  the  principles  of  art  in  his  head,  and  all  the  works 
of  the  great  models  ranged  in  order  round  his  desk.  His 
tropes  and  similes  seem  to  he  selected  from  a common-place 
book,  and  he  seldom  ventures  to  describe  a striking  incident, 
without  invoking  the  rhythm  and  diction  of  the  singer  of 
the  HCneid.1  But  even  the  sustained  and  agreeable  correct- 
ness of  his  fifteen  thousand  verses  almost  deserves  our  admi- 
ration, and  we  feel  that  such  a poem  could  hardly  have  in- 
herited the  immortality  which  is  so  large  a share  of  fame, 
had  not  its  editors,  its  transcribers,  and  its  readers,  regarded 
it,  in  some  sense,  as  the  representative  of  an  epoch,  and  im- 
portant for  its  just  conception.2  For  Silius  does,  in  fact, 
represent  to  us  the  refined,  the  highly  instructed,  the  now 
tamed  and  sobered  patrician  of  the  Flavian  era,  to  whom  the 
early  history  of  his  countrymen  was  a fit  subject  for  ideal 
description,  but  bore  no  practical  reference  to  the  circum- 
stances around  him.  In  his  mind  politics  are  a mere  blank. 
He  neither  reflects  on  the  present  nor  regrets  the  past.  To 
him  the  warriors  of  the  old  republic  are  no  longer  the  men 
of  the  forum  and  the  capitol,  such  as  he  sees  before  his  own 
eyes : they  have  passed  into  the  twilight  of  myths  and  demi- 
gods. To  him  Scipio  is  a second  Hercules,  the  achiever  of 
labours,  the  tamer  of  monsters,  the  umpire  of  the  divinities 
of  Pleasure  and  Virtue.  Hannibal  is  an  ogre  or  giant  of 
romance,  who  seems  to  vanish  at  the  catastrophe  of  the  story 
in  a tempest  of  flame  or  cloud.3  But  the  listless  complacence 

1 Pliny’s  criticism  on  Silius  Italieus,  “scribebat  carmina  majore  cura  quam 
mgenio  ” (Epist.  in.  '7.),  may  be  taken  as  a motto  for  the  literary  character  of 
the  age. 

2 It  should  be  observed,  however,  that  the  poem  of  Silius  Italieus  seems  to 
have  been  long  lost  to  the  ancients,  who  never  quote  it,  and  was  first  made 
known  to  us  by  the  accidental  discovery  of  a single  manuscript  in  the  fifteenth 
century.  Bahr,  Gesch.  der  Edmisch.  Lileralur , L 256. 

* Sil  Ital.  xv.  20,  foil.  xvii.  614. : 

“ Mihi  satque  superque 
Ut  me  Dardaniaj  matres,  atque  Itala  tellus, 

Dum  vivarn,  exspectent,  nec  pacem  pectore  norint” 


TINDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


225 


with  which  such  a poem  as  the  Punica  must  have  been  writ- 
ten and  perused,  and  the  faint  applause  its  recital  must  have 
elicited,  plainly  reveal  to  us  the  spirit  of  moderation  and 
mediocrity  which  had  succeeded,  in  the  high  places  of  Roman 
society,  to  the  whirlwinds  of  passion  and  licentiousness. 

A similar  comparison  may  be  instituted  between  the  two 
most  eminent  prose-writers  of  these  periods,  Seneca  and 
Quintilian.  There  is  a striking  correspondence  geneea  and 
between  these  celebrated  men  in  many  particu-  Quintilian- 
lars.  Both  were  Spaniards  by  origin,  and  were  bred,  we 
may  suppose,  in  the  same  school  of  florid  l'hetoric,  which  was 
supposed  to  impart  a peculiar  flavour  to  all  their  country- 
men’s compositions.  Each  was  attached  to  the  imperial 
court  of  his  own  era ; for  Quintilian,  after  a first  transient 
visit  to  Rome,  is  said  to  have  come  over  from  Spain  in  the 
train  of  Galba,  and  became,  in  course  of  time,  the  favoured 
tutor  of  Domitian’s  nephews.  Both  were  raised  from  mod- 
erate station  to  high  official  rank  and  distinction.  As  regards 
the  natural  bias  of  their  genius,  both  devoted  themselves  with 
enthusiasm  to  the  instruction  of  their  age,  and  became  teach- 
ers, or  rather  preachers,  of  the  doctrines  which  lay  nearest 
to  their  hearts.  If  philosophy  was  the  religion  of  Seneca, 
the  rights  and  duties  of  the  true  orator  were  held  in  no  less 
sacred  estimation  by  Quintilian,  and  the  author  of  the  well- 
known  Institution  of  a Speaker  believed  that  he  was  train- 
ing his  pupil  in  the  path  of  virtue,  while  equipping  him  for 
a public  career.1  But  with  these  points  of  analogy  between 
them,  no  two  masters  of  Latin  speech  stand  in  more  marked 
contrast  to  one  another  in  all  that  regards  the  acquired  quali- 
ties of  taste  and  judgment.  In  his  stilted  truisms  or  trans- 
parent paradoxes  Seneca  represents  an  age  of  overweening 
presumption  and  pretence,  while  the  sound  sense  of  Quintil- 
ian has  been  justly  admired  by  all  sober  critics.  Following 

1 This  feeling  may  be  traced  almost  throughout  Quintilian's  work  ; but  it  is 
distinctly  expressed  in  the  preface : “ oratorem  autem  instituimus  ilium  per- 
fectiun,  qui  esse  nisi  vir  bonus  non  potest.”  . . . . “ sit  orator  vir  talis,  quj 
vere  sapiens  appellari  potest.” 

TOL  VII. — 15 


226 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


in  the  wake  of  a period  abandoned  to  the  false  glitter  of 
rhetorical  fancy,  Quintilian  sets  himself,  with  unerring  in- 
stinct, to  correct  the  prevailing  theories  of  rhetorical  compo- 
sition, and  restore  the  true  standard  of  taste.  His  judgment 
is  independent  and  original.  Opposed  as  he  is  to  the  errors 
of  his  time,  he  does  not  rush  back  precipitately  to  an  earlier 
and  purer  age  for  his  models.  He  knows  of  no  perfect  age 
of  oratory,  no  absolute  example  of  eloquence.  His  mind  is 
open  to  excellence  in  any  quarter,  and  he  can  see  blemishes 
in  every  school,  and  in  every  master  of  the  art.  Hone  per- 
haps of  his  critical  canons  would  be  questioned  in  the  most 
enlightened  age  of  rhetorical  criticism ; nor  do  we  now  dis- 
pute the  justice  of  any  sentence  pronounced  from  his  tribunal 
on  the  heroes  of  ancient  literature.  If  indeed,  as  he  says 
himself  of  oratory,  the  student  who  admires  Cicero  has  al- 
ready advanced  far  in  the  art  of  which  Cicero  was  so  noble 
an  ornament,  so  we  may  affirm,  that  to  appreciate  Quintilian’s 
judgments  is  to  have  mastered  the  theory  of  literary  compo- 
sition.1 It  would  have  been  impossible  for  the  age  of  Clau- 
dius and  Nero  to  have  produced  a work  so  tolerant,  so 
temperate,  so  sage  as  the  Institution , and  we  must  ac- 
knowledge the  significance  of  the  revolution  it  denotes  in  the 
taste  and  feeling  of  the  people. 

It  may  be  presumed  that  Quintilian  represents  a class  of 
contemporary  critics,  and  that  his  careful  discrimination  of 
riiny  the  natu-  ru^es  °f  composition  was  strictly  in  the  fash- 
raiis't.  ion  of  his  day.  But  we  know  individuals  only, 

and  we  can  only  compare  together  individual  examples.  The 
scientific  method  of  the  Romans  in  the  department  of  literary 
criticism,  exemplified  in  this  grammarian,  contrasts  widely 
with  their  vague  empiricism  in  natural  philosophy,  as  reflect- 
ed in  the  work  of  the  elder  Pliny.  In  point  of  time,  indeed, 
Pliny  may  be  claimed  for  either  of  the  generations  we  are 
now  considering ; and  the  contrast  before  us  is  not  so  much 

' Quintil.  Inst.  x.  i.  112. : “ ille  se  profecisse  sciat  eui  Cicero  valde  placebit." 
Comp.  § 125.  his  unfavourable  judgment  of  Seneca. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


227 


of'  two  successive  epochs,  as  of  ordinary  training  in  two  sev 
eral  branches  of  knowledge.  It  is  only  to  the  moral  sciences 
indeed,  as  taught  among  the  Romans,  that  the  term  training 
can  he  fairly  applied.  In  natural  philosophy  they  were  left 
to  pick  up  knowledge  by  desultory  reading,  or  casual  obser- 
vation, without  system  or  analytic  instruction  of  any  kind. 
Even  the  extensive  professoriate  of  the  Flavian  and  later  em- 
perors comprised  no  chairs  for  the  teaching  of  mathematics, 
astronomy,  geography,  or  any  branch  of  natural  history. 
The  crude  and  unwieldy  encyclopaedia  of  the  Natural  History 
has  been  preserved,  in  all  probability,  by  its  being  the  only 
great  repertory  of  facts  of  the  kind  to  which  the  inquirers  of 
Western  Europe  in  the  Middle  Ages  could  refer;  and  this 
happy  accident  has  revealed  to  us  the  remarkable  deficiency 
of  Roman  civilization  in  this  particular.  Amassed  from  a 
boundless  variety  of  sources,  and  from  writers,  both  Greek 
and  Latin,  of  every  degree  of  credit,  the  data  presented  by 
Pliny  embrace  a wonderful  amount  of  correct  observation 
and  true  tradition ; but  the  assiduous  collector  seems  to  have 
exercised  little  judgment,  and  depending  almost  Avholly  on 
books,  made  a very  imperfect  use  of  his  own  eyes  and  experi- 
ence. He  cares  not  to  discriminate  between  his  authorities ; 
he  does  not  compare,  digest,  select,  and  reject ; he  simply  ac- 
cumulates, till  his  judgment  becomes  paralysed,  as  it  were, 
by  the  weight  imposed  upon  it.  Oppressed  with  the  immen- 
sity and  multiformity  of  X ature,  the  stores  of  which  are  thus 
unrolled  in  a confused  and  shifting  scroll  before  him,  Pliny 
does  not  demand  a Purpose  and  a Providence  to  maintain 
the  harmony  which  he  fails  to  appreciate ; he  denies  the  ex- 
istence of  the  law  which  he  cannot  perceive,  and,  in  the  cra- 
ven spirit  of  his  age,  takes  refuge  in  the  shadowy  dream-land 
of  Pantheism  from  the  perplexity  in  which  his  own  empiri- 
cism involves  him.  The  works  of  Mature  are  to  him  Mature 
itself,  and  Mature  itself  is  the  God  of  Mature.1 

1 Plin.  Hist.  Nat.  ii.  1.  foil. : “Mundum  ....  numen  esse  eredi  par  est, 
Eeternum,  immensum,  neque  genitum  neque  interiturum  unquam  ....  Idem 
rerum  naturae  opus,  et  rerum  ipsa  natura.  . . . Solem  mundi  esse  totius  animum 


228 


HISTORT  OF  THE  ROMANS 


It  would  seem  that  the  establishment  of  the  professorial 
system  throughout  the  empire  by  Yespasian,  further  ampli- 
fied oy  his  successors,  helped  to  unfold  the  char- 

The  poets  of  / . ’ 1 

scholastic  actenstics  we  remark  m the  mind  and  literature 
of  the  age  before  us.  The  compositions  of  the 
Flavian  era,  it  will  be  readily  allowed,  are  impressed  with  the 
features  of  accuracy  and  finish,  and  may  be  advantageously 
compared,  in  this  respect,  with  the  loose  and  somewhat  aim- 
less style  of  the  writers  of  the  age  preceding,  who  had  been 
trained  by  the  declaimers  only.  Silius,  Statius,  and  Valerius 
Flaccus  are  poets  of  the  School  and  the  Academy.  They 
have  imbibed  the  lessons  of  conventional  criticism  under 
methodical  and  sensible  teachers,  men  of  Quintilian’s  stamp ; 
and  they  have  sought  and  won,  after  many  essays,  the  prizes 
of  Alba  and  the  Capitol.  The  satires  of  Juvenal  are  more 
definite  in  their  scope  than  those  of  Persius.  There  is  no 
vagueness  of  aim,  no  mistiness  of  language,  about  the  Flavian 
moralist,  the  academic  professor  of  virtue.  The  crimes  and 
vices  he  denounces  are  pilloried  in  the  public  eye  ; every  line 
as  it  speeds  along,  flings  its  dart  of  contumely  upon  them ; 
and  we  rise  from  perusing  any  one  of  his  pieces  (except  the 
Sixteenth,  which  is  probably,  and  the  Fifteenth,  which  is 
possibly  not  his  own)  with  the  feeling  that  there  is  not  a 
verse  deficient,  nor  a verse  redundant,  through- 
pared  with  Per-  out  it.  For  the  defects  of  Persius,  youth  may  be 
pleaded  in  excuse : such,  however,  as  we  have 
received  them,  his  poems  want  this  steadiness  of  aim ; and  we 

ac  planius  mentem ; liunc  principale  naturae  regimen  ac  nmnen  credere  licet. 
. . . Quisquis  est  Deus,  si  modo  est  alius,  et  quacunque  in  parte,  totus  est 


Eiensus,  totus  visus,  totus  auditus,  totus  animi,  totus  sui Deus  est  mor- 

tali  juyare  mortalem,  etc Invenit  tamen  . . . sibi  ipsa  mortalitas 


numen,  quominus  etiam  plana  de  Deo  conjectatio  esset.  Toto  quippe  mundo 
et  locis  omnibus,  omnibusque  horis  omnium  vocibus  Fortuna  sola  invocatur. 
. . . Pars  alia  et  banc  pellit,  astroque  suo  eventus  assignat,  nascendi  legibus. 
....  Sedere  coepit  sententia  btec,  pariterque  et  eruditum  vulgus  et  rude  in 
earn  cursu  vadit.  . . . Imperfectae  vero  in  homine  naturae  prsecipua  solatia  ne 
Deum  quidem  posse  omnia.  . . . per  quae  declarator  baud  dubie  nalurce  poietv 
lia , idque  esse  quod  Deum  vocamus.” 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


229 


often  pause  in  reading  them  to  hesitate  and  reflect,  and  after 
all  to  little  purpose,  in  order  to  grasp  his  object.  The 
satires  of  Persius  are  the  natural  product  of  an  age  which 
advanced  words  above  things,  and  urged  the  writer  to  seek 
a momentary  triumph  for  a smart  or  sounding  phrase,  rather 
than  give  lasting  satisfaction  to  his  readers  by  the  interest  of 
a sustained  argument. 

Another  star  in  the  Flavian  constellation,  another  product 
of  the  same  era,  is  the  brilliant  poet  Statius.  The  Academic 
literature  of  Rome  was  a refined  adaptation  of 

i _ Statins  com- 

the  style  first  created  at  Alexandria  by  the  lec-  pared  with 
turers  of  the  Museum  under  the  sunshine  of  court 
patronage.  Antimachus,  whose  poem  on  the  war  of  Thebes 
is  said  to  have  been  the  model  of  the  epic  of  Statius,  was  a 
forerunner  of  the  Alexandrian  school ; but,  in  taking  for  his 
guide  this  ancient  master,  the  accomplished  Roman  allowed 
himself  some  licence,  and  studied  superior  refinement.  The 
chief  points  indeed  of  incident  and  character  in  a theme  so 
trite  had  become  arbitrarily  fixed,  and  the  Flavian  critics 
would  hardly  suffer  a new  competitor  for  the  prize  of  excel- 
lence to  depart  widely  from  Ms  formula.  Amidst  all  the 
licentiousness  of  prevailing  unbelief,  the  mythology  of  the 
poets  was  as  much  a matter  of  conventional  treatment  as  the 
sacred  painting  of  the  Middle  Ages ; and  we  must  bear  in 
mind,  that  much  in  their  mode  of  treatment  which  seems  to 
us  vapid  and  jejune,  appeared  far  otherwise  to  a generation 
which  saw  it  in  the  light  of  an  established  tradition.  As 
regards  Ms  subject,  Statius  walks  in  fetters:  he  could  not 
create  or  Mnovate.  Nevertheless,  there  is,  perhaps,  no 
ancient  epic  so  perfect  inform  and  argument  as  the  Thebaid. 
Its  story  is  the  most  compact  of  all ; its  incidents  and  charac- 
ters, however  palely  delmeated,  are  not  less  various  in  pro- 
portion to  its  length  than  those  of  the  Iliad ; its  unity  is  un- 
doubtedly more  complete.  If  it  wants  the  central  figure 
which  predominates  over  the  vicissitudes  of  the  fiEneid,  it 
presents  us  instead  with  a grand  procession  of  Seven  Heroes 
of  equal  fame  and  prowess,  in  all  the  sevenfold  blaze  of  their 


230 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


legendary  glory.  But  the  versifier  of  a cultivated  age  and  a 
refined  society  cannot  impart  a sustained  and  lofty  interest  to 
a story  purely  mythological;  and  the  contemporaries  of 
Statius  felt,  we  may  believe,  as  much  as  modern  readers, 
that  it  was  not  for  the  story  that  his  poem  was  to  be  studied. 
The  merits  of  this  admirable  poet  are  such  as  detract  from, 
l ather  than  enhance,  the  proper  charm  of  epic  song.  Statius 
is  a miniature-painter,  employed  by  the  freak  of  a patron  or 
from  some  peculiar  misapprehension  of  his  own  powers,  on  the 
production  of  a great  historic  picture.  Every  part,  every  line, 
every  shade  is  touched  and  re-touched ; approach  the  canvas 
and  examine  it  with  glasses,  every  thread  and  hair  has  evi- 
dently received  the  utmost  care,  and  taken  the  last  polish ; 
but,  step  backwards,  and  embrace  the  whole  composition  in 
one  gaze,  and  the  general  effect  is  confused  from  want  of 
breadth  and  largeness  of  treatment. 

The  Thebaid  was  recited,  we  may  believe,  in  portions  to 
connoisseurs  and  critics,  and  the  author  was  doubtless  misled 
by  the  applause  which  naturally  was  excited  by  the  exquisite 
finish  of  successive  jteriods.  A genteel  mob  assembled  on 
the  day  of  each  promised  performance,  and  the  youth  of  Italy 
carried  off  the  fragments  in  their  memory,  and  repeated  them 
to  the  admiring  circles  of  their  acquaintance.1  Assuredly 
their  judgment  would  have  been  modified,  had  they  stayed 
to  view  the  composition  in  its  full  proportions ; and  the 
author  himself  would  have  done  more  justice  to  his  powers, 
could  he  have  renounced  the  insidious  flatteries  of  his  age, 
and  written  in  patience  and  solitude  for  immortality.2  The 

1 Juvenal,  vii.  82. : 

“ Curritur  ad  vocem  jucundam  et  carmen  amic® 

Thebaidos,  Isetam  fecit  cum  Statius  urbem 
Promisitque  diem.” 

Compare  the  author’s  self-congratulations.  Theb.  xii.  in.  fin. : 

“Itala  jam  studio  discit  memoratque  juventus.” 

3 Thus  the  outline  of  the  description  of  the  death  of  Amphiaraus  {Theb.  vii. 
690-823.),  relieved  from  many  tinsel  ornaments  and  laboured  effects,  is  one  of 
the  noblest  flights  of  poetry ; and  the  discovery  of  Achilles  among  the  daugh 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


2H1 


genius  of  Statius  may  bear  comparison  in  some  respects  with 
that  of  Ovid,  while  the  contrast  which  strikes  us  at  once  in 
the  perusal  of  their  works  is  just  such  as  would  result  from 
the  different  character  of  their  times.  The  author  of  the 
Thebaid,  the  Achilleid,  and  the  Sylvse  is  hardly  inferior  in 
readiness  and  fertility  to  the  distinguished  singer  of  the 
Metamorphoses,  the  Heroids,  and  the  Art  of  Love.  But 
while  the  earlier  writer  is  suffered  by  the  taste  of  his  era  to 
riot  in  the  wanton  indulgence  of  his  humour,  and  let  his  fancy 
rove  with  loose  untrammelled  graces,  the  later  is  subjected 
to  strict  curb  and  rein,  his  paces  are  those  of  the  manege,  not 
of  nature ; all  is  art,  all  is  discipline  and  training ; every 
effect  is  exquisite  in  itself,  but  the  effort  is  too  apparent  in 
the  author,  and  the  strain  on  the  mind  of  the  reader  too 
fatiguing.  Ovid  lost  half  his  strength  by  his  licentious 
exuberance ; Statius  deprives  himself  of  his  real  vigour  by 
swathing  his  own  limbs  in  bandages.  A true  instinct  is 
charmed  neither  by  the  splay  foot  of  the  mountain  peasant 
girl,  nor  by  the  tortured  limb  of  the  Chinese  lady  of  fashion. 

Almost  every  group  of  three  or  four  lines  in  Statius  con- 
stitutes in  itself  an  idea,  perhaps  a conceit,  a play  of  thought 
or  of  words ; it  fastens  itself  like  a burr  on  the 

. . . ..  Martial  com- 

memory:  such  is  the  distmctness  of  his  vision,  mrd  with 
such  the  elaborate  accuracy  of  his  touch.  The 
epigram  is  the  crowning  result  of  this  elaborate  terseness  of 
diction,  and  this  lucid  perception  of  the  aim  in  view.  The 
verses  of  Martial  are  the  quintessence  of  the  Flavian  poetry. 
The  fine  point  to  which  he  sharpens  his  conceptions  is  the 

ters  of  Lycomedes  {A chill,  ii.  200.),  though  a little  overlaid  with  words,  seems 
to  reach  the  summit  of  sublimity  : 

. . . “ cum  grande  tuba,  sic  jussus,  Agyrtea 

Insonuit 

Illius  intact®  cecidere  a pectore  vestes  : 

Jam  clypeus,  breviorque  manu  consumitur  hasta  ; 

Mira  fides,  Ithacumque  humeris  excedere  visus, 
dEtolumque  ducem  : tantum  subita  arma  calorque 
Martius  horrenda  confundit  luce  Penates  . . . .” 


232 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


last  triumph  of  that  verbal  exactness  and  mechanical  inge- 
nuity to  which  we  pay  a tribute  of  hardly  less  admiration 
in  Statius  and  Valerius  Flaccus.  The  careful  felicity  of 
Horace  is  reproduced  in  Martial  under  the  form  which  most 
aptly  befits  the  later  age  in  which  he  flourished.  The  lyrics 
of  the  Augustan  period  are  characteristically  represented  by 
the  epigrams  of  the  Flavian.  The  style  of  Martial  has  indeed 
this  advantage  over  that  of  Horace,  that  he  goes  always 
straight  to  his  point,  and  there  can  be  no  misconception  of 
his  drift ; while  Horace  seems  sometimes  to  wander  from  his 
purpose,  to  lose  himself  and  leave  hold,  at  least  for  a moment, 
of  his  subject.  There  are  several  of  the  Odes,  the  exact 
scope  of  which  the  critics  cannot  ascertain;  the  leading  idea 
is  sometimes  lost  at  the  outset,  and  unrecovered  to  the  end.1 2 
As  regards  this  uncertainty  of  aim,  the  Eclogues  even  of  the 
correct  and  self-possessed  Virgil  may  be  contrasted  with  the 
Sylvse  of  Statius.  Among  the  thirty  poems  of  this  Flavian 
collection,  there  is  none  about  the  scope  and  meaning  of 
which  there  can  be  any  question ; none  in  which  the  leading 
idea  is  lost  or  overlaid  by  thick  springing  fancies;  while 
more  than  one  of  the  Eclogues  remains  to  this  day  an  in- 
soluble problem  to  the  interpreters.3  This  again  may  be 
noted  as  a direct  result  of  the  systematic  education,  the 
academic  or  professorial  training,  of  the  Flavian  period. 

In  the  department  of  poetical  composition  this  precision 
of  aim  and  studied  completeness  of  execution  tend  to  prosaic 
and  positive  results.  They  lead  the  mind  to 

The  historians  . . 

of  the  Flavian  dwell  on  material  objects,  as  the  most  proper  lor 
accurate  delineation.  Hence  the  poetry  of  the 
Flavian  age  is  generally  limited  in  its  range,  and  refers 
mostly  to  the  material  elements  of  the  civilization  which 

1 Thus  we  must  look  for  the  help  of  allegory  to  explain  Od.  i.  14,  IS.,  iii.  4. 
In  iii.  2,  3,  27  and  others — “ fertur  equis  auriga  ” — the  poet  seems  to  lose  his 
command  of  Pegasus.  This  carelessness  is  possibly  studied,  and  may  perhaps 
be  effective  according  to  the  proper  idea  of  dithyrambics  ; but  it  is  worth  whil# 
to  contrast  it  with  the  neatness  and  precise  execution  of  Statius  or  Martial. 

2 Such,  for  instance,  are  the  first,  the  fourth,  and  the  eighth  eclogue. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


23? 

lies  within  the  immediate  scope  of  its  vision.  If  it  ventures 
to  unfold  to  an  unbelieving  age  the  mystic  lore  of  ancient 
supernaturalism,  it  invests  traditions  and  legends  Avith  the 
hard  colouring  of  modern  actuality.  The  nymphs  and  heroes 
of  Statius  seem  copied  from  the  courtiers  of  the  Palatine ; 
the  Medea  of  Valerius  Flaccus  is  a Virago  of  the  imperial 
type,  a Lollia  or  an  Agrippina.  In  history,  however,  which, 
at  the  period  now  before  us,  has  outstripped  poetry  in  interest 
and  value,  the  tendencies  of  the  age  produce  new  and  im 
portant  consequences.  An  age  of  positive  thought  developes 
legitimate  history.  The  historian  of  the  Flavian  era  is  no 
longer  a chronicler  or  a romancer.  He  may  seek  perhaps  to 
mould  the  truth  to  his  own  prejudices ; hut  he  is  not  a mere 
artist,  indifferent  to  truth  altogether.  He  is  a philosopher, 
and  recognizes  a mission.  He  has  his  own  theories  of  society 
and  politics ; the  events  of  the  period  before  him  group 
themselves  in  his  mind  in  certain  natural  combinations,  ac- 
cording to  the  leading  idea  to  which  they  are  subordinated. 
If  he  is  a man  of  imagination,  he  paints  the  world  from  the 
type  impressed  on  his  own  organs  of  vision.  Whether  or 
not  the  facts  be  correctly  represented,  they  are  at  least  true 
to  him ; he  describes  what  he  sees,  or  really  fancies  that  he 
sees.  Works  that  hear  this  stamp  of  imagination  are  im- 
mortal. Their  details  may  he  inexact ; the  genius  by  which 
they  are  produced  may  he  uncritical;  hut  their  general  effect 
is  strong  and  vivid,  and  they  leave  a mark  behind  them 
which  cannot  he  effaced.  Appian  traces  the  an-  Appiail  and 
nals  of  mankind  along  the  lines  by  which  the  Hutarch- 
various  races  and  countries  are  politically  connected  with 
Rome.  In  Plutarch’s  mind,  on  the  contrary,  history  is  the 
painting  of  individual  character.  Each  writer  works  out  his 
own  conception  in  wide  contrast  with  the  other;  hut  each 
collects  and  marshals  his  facts  with  the  sole  object  of  illus- 
trating it. 

Livy,  indeed,  the  great  historian  of  the  Augustan  age, 
writes  with  a strong  and  vivid  perception  of  the  scenes  and 


234 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


incidents  he  describes.  The  men  whose  portraits 

Tacitus  com-  . 1 

jKired  with  decorate  the  long  galleries  through  which  he 
roams,  have  a distinct  form  and  character  in  his 
mind,  and  he  paints  truly  from  the  lineaments  before  him. 
But  Livy’s  was  not  an  age  of  speculation.  He  had  no  doc- 
trine in  history  or  politics,  beyond  a vague  conviction  of  the 
greatness  and  invincibility  of  Rome,  and  an  assurance  of  her 
triumphant  destiny.  Very  different  is  the  case  with  Livy’s 
great  rival,  Tacitus.  The  subtler  genius  of  the  later  period 
is  reflected  on  the  pages  of  this  philosophic  theorist,  who 
constructs  the  history  of  the  empire  with  reference  to  a 
dominant  idea  iu  his  own  mind.  The  object  of  Tacitus, 
conceived  in  the  patrician  school  to  which  he  had  attached 
himself,  is  to  show  that  the  supremacy  of  Rome,  the  final 
cause  of  her  existence,  depends  on  the  preeminence  of  an 
oligarchy,  with  which  all  her  glories  and  successes  are  closely 
entwined.  He  regards  the  downfall  of  this  caste  under  the 
Caesarean  usurpation  as  the  fruitful  source  .of  the  degrada- 
tions and  miseries  by  which  her  later  career  has  been  sullied. 
The  empire  has  been  disgraced  by  tyranny,  by  profligacy, 
and  base  compliances  at  home ; by  defeats  and  humiliations 
abroad.  The  free  spirit  of  the  optimate  has  been  repressed, 
and  he  has  been  constrained  to  cringe,  and  flatter,  not  pa- 
tricians only  of  equal  nobility  with  his  own,  but  the  meaner 
offspring  of  the  lesser  houses ; not  new  men  only,  and  un- 
ennobled Romans,  but  even  upstart  foreigners  and  enfran- 
chised bondmen.  Great  national  disasters  have  indicated, 
in  rapid  succession,  the  disgust  of  the  gods  at  the  degeneracy 
of  their  chosen  favourites,  at  the  contempt  into  which  their 
own  altars  have  fallen,  and  the  blasphemy  by  which  divine 
honours  have  been  extended  to  the  vilest  of  mortals.  The 
spirit  and  idea  of  Tacitus’s  history  is  closely  repi’esented  in 
the  kindred  epic  of  Lucan,  which  only  expresses  more  bluntly 
and  without  even  the  pretence  of  historic  impartiality,  as 
was  natural  in  a youth  and  a poet,  the  feeling  of  indignant 
Tacitus  and  dissatisfaction  common  to  both.  But  Tacitus, 
Lucan.  mature  in  years  and  cool  in  temper,  used  more 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


235 


discretion  in  the  handling  of  his  theory  than  the  reckless 
declaim er  of  five-and-twenty.  The  plan  of  Lucan’s  poem 
entangles  him  in  the  causes  of  the  revolution  which  they 
deplore  and  denounce  in  common ; and  we  learn  from  some 
of  the  wisest  as  well  as  the  most  eloquent  verses  in  the 
jPharsalia,  that  the  revolution,  even  in  the  eyes  of  an  aristo- 
crat, was  unavoidable ; that  it  was  produced  by  the  crimes 
and  excesses  of  that  very  period  of  aristocratic  domination 
to  which  both  look  back  with  equal  regret ; that  the  Roman 
oligarchy  fell  by  its  own  vices,  vices  inherent  in  its  political 
constitution,  as  well  as  by  the  strong  rebound  of  its  own 
victories  and  triumphs.1  We  perceive  that  its  fall,  once 
consummated,  was  final  and  irretrievable;  that  no  honour  or 
generosity  in  a J ulius  or  an  Augustus,  no  martial  ardour  in 
a Tiberius,  no  discretion  in  a Caius  or  a Claudius,  no  dignity 
in  a Nero,  could  have  restored  the  vital  glow  of  a divine 
inspiration  which  had  fled  forever  with  the  Scipios  and  the 
Gracchi. 

It  was,  however,  an  error  in  Lucan  thus  to  lift  the  veil 
from  the  licentiousness  of  the  era  he  affected  to  lament, 
Tacitus,  with  more  skill  and  prudence,  draws  the  intimity  of 
eyes  of  his  . audience  from  it  altogether.  The  his- 
torian  commences  his  review  of  Roman  affairs  01  Ms  hiStory- 
with  the  period  which  succeeds  the  revolution,  after  its  first 
and  immediate  fruits  have  been  reaped,  and  the  benefits,  un- 
deniable as  they  were,  which  it  in  the  first  instance  produced, 
had  lost  some  of  their  original  brightness  in  his  countrymen’s 
memory.  The  Caesarean  usurpation  had  run  a course  of  sixty 
years, — years  of  unexampled  prosperity,  as  Tacitus  must  him- 
self have  acknowledged,  had  he  set  them  fairly  before  his 
eyes, — when  he  takes  up  the  thread  of  events,  and  devotes 
the  labour  of  his  life  to  blazoning  the  disasters  which  have 
never  ceased,  as  he  pretends,  to  flow  from  it.  He  confines 
himself  to  the  decline  and  fall  of  the  system  which  had  now 

1 Lucan,  Pliarsal.  L 84-182.  : “ Tu  causa  malorum  Facta  tribus  dominw 
communis  Roma Et  concussa  fides  et  muitis  utile  bellum.” 


236 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


indeed  passed  its  brief  and  fallacious  prime.  He  traces  the 
failing  fortunes  of  the  republic  from  the  defeat  of  Varus,  and 
the  gloom  diffused  over  the  city  in  the  last  days  of  Augus- 
tus by  the  anticipation  of  a younger  tyranny,  and  closes  his 
gloomy  review  with  the  fall  of  the  last  of  the  despots,  the 
mean,  the  cruel,  the  jealous  Domitian.1  Thus  he  embraces 
precisely  the  whole  period  of  disgrace  and  disaster  by  which 
the  crimes  of  the  Caesars  were  chastised ; nor  will  he  mar  the 
completeness  of  this  picture  by  introducing  into  it  the  figures 
of  those  regenators  of  the  empire  whom  he  himself  lived 
afterwards  to  see,  the  record  of  whose  virtue  and  fortune  he 
reserves  for  the  solace  of  his  old  age.2 3  His  narrative  of  the 
civil  wars  which  followed  the  death  of  Hero,  and  of  the  three 
Flavian  administrations,  was  the  first  written,  under  the 
name  of  Histories  / while  the  account  of  the  earlier  period, 
known  by  the  title  of  Annals , was  produced  subsequently. 
The  work  which  treats  of  contemporary  affairs  is  more  full 
in  detail  than  the  other,  but  we  may  believe  that  the  author 
regarded  the  two  as  a single  whole ; and  it  is  possible  that 
he  may  have  contemplated  them  himself  under  a single  title. 
The  unity  of  their  common  design,  as  a lasting  record  of  the 
Caesarean  revolution  traced  to  its  distant  consequences,  would 
have  been  marred  by  a glowing  peroration  on  the  fame  and 
prosperity  of  Trajan ; nor  do  we  know  that  Tacitus  ever  actu- 
ally accomplished  the  labour  of  love  which  he  anticipated  as  his 
crowning  work.  Perhaps,  after  all,  he  felt  that  the  senatorial 
government  of  his  patron  rested  on  no  solid  foundations,  and 
shrank  at  the  last  moment  from  glorifying  the  merits  of  a 
constitution  which  depended  on  the  moderation  of  its  chief 
alone.  Vet  we  should  have  valued  as  the  noblest  of  legacies 
a temperate  and  candid  disquisition,  by  one  so  acute  and 
eloquent,  on  the  state  of  society  which  rendered  Trajan’s  rule 

1 Tac.  Ann,  i.  1. : “ consilium  miM  pauca  de  Augusto  et  extrema  tradere, 

mox  Tiberii  prineipatum  et  cetera.” 

3 Tac.  Hist.  i.  1. : “ quod  si  vita  suppeditet  prineipatum  D.  Nervas  et  i® 
perium  Trajani,  uberiorem  securioremque  materiam,  senectuti  seposui  ” 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


237 


the  best  then  possible,  and  made  the  existence  of  so  much 
good  so  lamentably  precarious. 

In  the  absence  of  legal  checks  on  the  caprice  or  tyranny 
of  the  ruler,  the  dagger  of  the  assassin,  or  at  best  the  revolt 
of  the  legions,  had  been  the  last  hope  and  safe-  prepossession 
guard  of  the  classes  obnoxious  to  bis  jealousy,  fovourof  Tra- 
II ie  moral  Ave  should  be  tempted,  at  first  sight,  Jan- 
to  draw  from  the  history  of  Tacitus,  is  that  the  moderation 
of  the  Flavian  empire  was  produced  at  last  by  the  repeated 
examples  of  successful  intrigue  against  the  bad  emperors.  But 
this  would  be  a wrong  conclusion.  The  moderation  and 
justice  of  the  virtuous  princes,  such  as  Vespasian  and  Trajan, 
was  the  effect  of  their  personal  character,  combined  with 
then’  fortunate  circumstances.  Vespasian  was  honoured  for 
his  military  prowess,  and  feared  for  his  military  firmness ; 
but  the  simplicity  of  his  tastes  exempted  him  from  the  temp- 
tation to  outshine  the  magnates  of  the  city,  and  his  frugal 
habits  sustained  him  in  the  path  of  probity  and  uprightness. 
The  personal  modesty  of  Trajan  was  equal  to  that  of  his  pre- 
decessor, and  for  the  brilliant  and  costly  monuments  with 
which  he  loved  to  decorate  the  city  he  provided  by  foreign 
conquests,  which,  at  the  same  time,  kept  his  soldiers  employ- 
ed, and  engrossed  the  attention  of  his  most  restless  subjects. 
He  resided,  moreover,  only  occasionally  in  the  capital,  and 
was  preserved  by  his  martial  occupations  from  the  dangers 
of  rivalry  in  show  or  popularity  with  the  scions  of  historic 
families  at  Rome.  The  senators  felt  instinctively  that  their 
best  security  lay  in  their  chief’s  distant  engagements.  Hence 
the  prepossession  of  Tacitus,  which  would  otherwise  seem 
unworthy  of  him,  in  favour  of  military  renown.  We  have 
remarked  his  sneers  at  the  peaceful  disposition  ascribed  to 
earlier  princes,  and  the  contrast  he  exultingly  indicates  be- 
tween the  pusillanimity  of  Tiberius,  of  Claudius,  or  of  Hero, 
and  the  victorious  ardour  of  his  own  patron.  It  was  but  too 
true,  as  the  nobles  were  well  aware,  that  the  liberties  of 
Rome,  the  preeminence,  more  properly,  of  the  Roman  opti* 
mates,  was  only  maintained,  as  far  as  it  was  maintained  at 


238 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


all.  under  any  of  the  emperors,  by  the  subjugation  of  the 
foreigner,  and  the  overthrow  of  liberty  abroad.  Such  is  the 
theory  carelessly  avowed  by  Lucan  ; and  the  thoughtful  his- 
torian, though  more  reticent  in  expression,  betrays  no  more 
real  respect  for  the  dignity  and  common  rights  of  man  than 
the  impetuous  declaimer  of  the  Pharsalia d 

The  theory  of  Roman  politics  to  which  Tacitus  committed 

himself  involved  him  in  two  sins  against  truth  and  candour. 

Certain  diarae-  W e cannot  read  the  Annals  and  Histories  with 
teristics  of  Iris  . . . . 

ud fairness  to  care  and  impartiality  without  perceiving  that  the 
the  earlier  pe-  . „ , . , _ 

nod.  author  olten  allows  himself  to  repeat  anecdotes 

which  he  knew  to  have  no  firm  foundation,  for  the  sake  of 
illustrating  the  view  he  chooses  to  give  of  some  prominent 
personages.  IST o passage  in  the  Annals  exemplifies  more 
strikingly  the  dissimulation  imputed  to  Tiberius,  than  the 
reception  given  to  Sejanus’s  suit  for  an  imperial  alliance. 
Yet  the  narrative,  whatever  its  source,  is  highly  embellished, 
if  not  wholly  fabricated.1 2  Tacitus  we  must  say  at  least,  gave 
it  too  easy  credence,  and  flung  over  it  a deeper  colour,  for 
the  sake  of  the  dark  shade  it  casts  on  the  character  of  the 
arch-dissembler.  Nor  is  this,  as  has  been  shown,  the  only 
instance  of  his  disregard  for  truthfulness  in  subservience  to 
the  demands  of  a theory,  which  required  him  to  deepen  the 
suspicions  attaching  to  the  character  of  so  many  of  the 
Csesars.  Again  we  must  remark  the  artifice  by  which  the 
crimes  and  vices  of  the  emperors  are  arrayed  in  evidence 
against  the  imperial  government  itself,  and  denounced  as  sins 
against  the  moral  sense  of  an  outraged  society.  Even  if  we 
grant  that  there  is  no  exaggeration  in  these  hideous  pictures, 
yet  we  must  not  allow  the  most  accomplished  of  painters  to 

1 This  spirit  appears  in  many  passages  of  Lucan’s  poem.  Compare  moi^ 
particularly  i.  8,  foil.  vii.  421,  foil.  It  is  betrayed  by  Tacitus  wherever  he 
speaks  of  the  foreign  affairs  of  the  empire,  and  of  her  contests  with  Britons, 
with  Germans,  or  with  Parthians.  The  “ Life  of  Agricola  ” is  animated  with  it 
throughout,  nor  is  it  banished  even  from  the  “ Germany,”  the  subject  of  which 
afforded  a graceful  opportunity  for  renouncing  and  regretting  it. 

a See  above  in  chapter  xlv.  of  this  history  (Tac.  Ann.  iv.  39,  40.). 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


239 


disguise  the  important  fact  that  such  horrors  belong  to  the 
age  and  the  class,  and  not  to  the  individual  culprit  only. 
The  barbarities  wreaked  by  1ST ero  and  Domitian  on  the  high- 
born nobles  of  Rome  were  but  the  ordinary  precautions  of 
the  trembling  slaveholders  whose  lives  were  held  from  day 
to  day  by  the  tenure  of  physical  repression  unrelentingly 
exercised  against  their  own  bondmen.  The  existence  of 
slavery,  and  the  lack  of  religious  and  moral  principle,  which 
loosened  the  rivets  of  Pagan  society,  may  account  for  the 
atrocities  commonly  imputed  to  the  inherent  viciousness  of 
the  imperial  system,  or  to  the  personal  depravity  of  individ- 
ual emperors.  Tacitus  himself  was  no  doubt  a master  of 
slaves,  and  his  writings  bear,  it  must  be  confessed,  the  im- 
press of  a rooted  disregard  for  the  rights  and  feelings  of  hu- 
man nature,  apart  from  his  own  class  and  order,  such  as 
might  naturally  be  engendered  by  the  social  atmosphere 
around  him.  On  the  other  hand,  few  even  of  the  gravest 
characters  of  our  history  were  exempt  from  turpitudes  which 
have  heaped  especial  infamy  on  Tiberius  and  Nero.  Such 
delinquencies  must  be  weighed  with  constant  reference  to  a 
peculiar  standard  of  morals.  Even  the  mild  and  virtuous 
Pliny  allows  himself  to  compose  verses  of  a nature  which 
would  indicate  among  us  the  most  shameless  indecency ; and 
the  list  of  names  by  which  he  excuses  himself  includes  a large 
number  of  the  first  citizens  of  the  free  state  as  well  as  of  the 
empire.1 

It  is  not  necessary,  however,  to  prove  that  both  the  cruel- 
ty and  the  licentiousness  of  Roman  society  date  from  some 

1 Pliny,  Epp.  iv.  14.,  v.  3.,  vii.  4.  Such  indecencies,  neatly  expressed  in 
verses  of  society,  after  the  manner  of  the  later  Greek  epigrammatists,  might  be 
veiled  under  the  euphemism  oifaeetus  or  “ elegant.”  Comp,  “tunicis  subductis 
facetus,”  Hor.  Sat.  i.  2.  26.,  and  the  use  of  the  word  in  Martial’s  epigrams  on 
Sulpicia,  x.  35.  38.  Although  Tacitus  himself  is  not  mentioned  by  Pliny 
among  the  writers  of  such  “ Hendecasyllables,”  the  fragmentary  notice  of  Pul- 
gentius  in  Hythol.,  “ Corn.  Tacitus  in  libro  facetiarum,”  may  throw  a shade  of 
suspicion  even  over  this  grave  philosopher. 


240 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


His  satirical  hundred  years  before  the  establishment  of  the 
tioi7o?  bis0flta"  empire,  and  were  the  seeds  rather  than  the  fruit 
times-  of  the  imperial  despotism.  A more  specious 

charge  against  the  empire  is,  that  under  its  leaden  rule  little 
scope  was  left  for  the  free  and  healthy  exercise  of  mind,  and 
that  the  faculties  curbed  in  their  legitimate  exercise  expended 
themselves  on  gross  material  interests.  Not  the  Histories 
only,  hut  all  the  other  works  of  Tacitus,  are  drawn  up  almost 
in  the  form  of  indictments  against  his  own  age.  The  treatise 
on  the  Decline  of  Eloquence  traces  some  of  the  worst  symp- 
toms of  national  degeneracy,  not  only  to  the  change  in  the 
laws,  the  work  of  chiefs  and  princes,  hut  to  the  change  in 
manners,  and  especially  in  education,  the  same  which  had 
been  long  before  remarked  and  lamented  by  Horace.  The 
Life  of  Agricola  is  a satire  not  only  on  the  timid  and  jeal- 
ous emperor,  hut  on  the  indiscipline  of  the  legions,  the  in- 
competency of  the  commanders,  the  apathy  and  sensuality  of 
society,  with  all  which  the  great  captain  waged  distinguished 
warfare.  The  Germany  presents  an  elaborate  contrast  be- 
tween the  vices  of  a polished  age  and  the  virtues  of  barbar- 
ism. It  is  an  alarum  rung  in  the  ears  of  a careless  generation, 
more  solemn  and  impressive  in  its  tone,  more  interesting  from 
its  details,  hut  hardly  more  sound  than  Lucan’s  rhetorical 
outcry  on  his  countrymen’s  disgust  at  poverty,  and  eager 
greed  of  gold.  It  is  much  to  he  regretted  that  the  philoso- 
pher should  not  have  recognised,  any  more  than  the  poet,  the 
regenerative  tendencies  of  his  age,  and  have  lent  them  no 
support  from  his  name  and  influence.  The  aim  of  the  mere 
satirist  is  always  profitless  and  generally  ill-directed.  Not 
in  the  harsh  and  impracticable  dogmas  of  Stoicism,  nor 
merely  in  the  lofty  aspirations  of  Christianity,  hut  even  in 
the  wise  preaching  of  schools  of  eclectic  moralists,  whom  we 
shall  further  notice  hereafter,  lay  the  germs  of  renovation ; 
and  we  shall  trace  in  another  generation  the  action  of  a 
Dion,  a Plutarch,  an  Apollonius,  and  lament  that  we  cannot 
add  to  the  list  of  Roman  reformers  the  illustrious  name  of 
Tacitus. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


241 


Such  is  the  unfairness  into  which  the  historian  is  betrayed, 
in  attempting  to  uphold  the  paradox  that  the  corrupt  and 
totterino-  oligarchy  of  the  senate  under  Pompeius 

n ,.,6  ° , , , r The  writings 

and  Milo  was  the  noblest  and  strongest  of  govern-  of  Tacitus 

_ - _ „ , . . more  hiograph- 

ments,  and  the  not  more  defensible  paradox  that  icaithan  Ms- 

just  such  a government  was  restored  under  the 
auspices  of  ISTerva  and  Trajan.  We  must  acknowledge, 
indeed,  that  the  same  training  in  dialectic  subtleties  which 
urged  him  to  maintain  a political  theory,  rendered  him  gener- 
ally superior  to  the  rhetorical  declaimers  before  him.  In 
philosophical  remark  Tacitus  is  more  profound  than  Cicero, 
more  just  than  Seneca ; while  none  would  pretend  to  compare 
him  with  an  ingenious  sophist  like  Sallust.  Born  in  the 
reign  of  Claudius  or  Hero,  he  passed  his  early  years  in  the 
gloomy  silence  of  an  age  of  terror,  and  the  posts  in  which  he 
was  placed  by  Vespasian  and  retained  by  Domitian,  con- 
strained him  still  to  control  the  utterance  of  the  indignant 
patriotism  boiling  within  him.1  The  habit  of  looking  to  the 
emperor  as  the  source  of  political  action,  natural  to  his  posi- 
tion, would  give  to  his  account  of  public  affairs  a biographical 
rather  than  a historical  character.  The  efforts,  easily  discern- 
ible, which  he  makes  to  impart  to  it  a more  general  interest 
by  introducing  larger  disquisitions  on  manners,  and  some 
statistical  details,  evince,  under  these  circumstances,  unusual 
vigour  of  mind.  More  than  once,  indeed,  Tacitus  breaks 
away,  not  from  the  palace  only,  but  from  the  capital,  to  de- 
scribe the  condition  of  the  legions  on  the  frontier,  or  of  the 
foreign  possessions  of  the  state.  The  reader,  disgusted  with 

1 Our  nearest  approximation  to  the  date  of  the  historian’s  birth  is  derived 
from  a passage  of  Pliny  the  younger,  Epist.  vii.  20.,  where  he  speaks  of  him- 
self as  somewhat  the  junior  of  the  two.  Pliny  was  bom  in  63.  Tacitus 
married  the  daughter  of  Agricola  about  the  year  77,  being  then  probably  not 
less  than  twenty-one.  Of  his  official  career,  he  says,  at  the  beginning  of  the 
Histories  : “ Mihi  Galba,  Otho,  YiteUius  nec  beneficio  nec  injuria  cogniti.  Dig- 
nitatem nostram  a Yespasiano  inehoatam,  a Tito  auctam,  a Domitiano  longius 
provectam  non  abnuerim.”  He  was  absent  from  Rome  for  four  years  before 
the  death  of  Agricola  in  93.  ( Agric . 45.) ; probably  in  office  in  the  provinces 
Nerva  made  him  consul  suffect  in  97. 

126  vol.  vii. — 


242 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


the  horrors  of  the  Caesarean  court,  glances  w ith  pleasure  at 
Egypt  and  Palestine,  and  gains  a new  insight  into  Roman 
ideas,  from  the  views  of  an  intelligent  Roman  on  the  wonders 
of  the  Nile-land,  or  the  superstitions  of  the  Jews.  But  these 
digressions  are  rare,  and  we  regret  that  Tacitus  had  not  more 
of  the  spirit  of  Herodotus,  or  that  his  notions  of  historical 
composition  forbade  him  to  range  more  freely  over  the  field 
of  Roman  politics  abroad.  We  must  not  fail,  however,  to 
give  him  full  credit  for  what  he  has  done  in  this  particular. 
Writers  of  less  genius,  such  as  Suetonius  for  instance,  were 
subdued  altogether  to  the  biographical  vein  by  the  circum- 
stances of  the  times.  To  a Roman  citizen,  especially  if  resi- 
nistoricai  im-  dent  in  Rome,  and  still  more  if  engaged,  however 
prince’seper-the  slightly,  in  the  conduct  of  affairs,  the  personal 
sonai  character.  cparacter  of  the  reigning  prince,  with  all  the 
anecdotes  which  might  serve  to  illustrate  it,  would  naturally 
supersede  every  other  topic  of  interest.  Whether  in  the 
senate  or  the  palace,  in  the  forum  or  the  circus,  the  Caesar 
was  the  centre  of  observation.  The  general  welfare  of  the 
empire,  and  the  particular  interests  of  cities  and  provinces, 
would  hardly  divert  the  historian’s  attention  for  a moment 
from  the  imperial  figure  in  the  foreground.  He  would  have 
no  care  to  generalize  his  remarks  on  the  current  of  public 
affairs.  To  him  the  Roman  empire  would  be  merely  Rome; 
the  people  would  be  lost  in  their  ruler.  His  curiosity  would 
be  confined  to  the  incidents  which  took  place  around  him  in 
the  streets  and  temples  of  the  great  city  ; to  the  condition  of 
noble  and  official  families  ; to  the  omens  reported  in  the  Capi- 
tol, and  the  whispered  intrigues  of  the  palace.  Hence  Sueto- 
nius seems  to  think  that  he  has  written  a Roman 

Hence  the  . . . 

biographies  of  history  m his  senes  of  lives  of  the  first  twelve 

Suetonius  sup-  _ , , . , 

ply  the  place  Csesars  ; and  we  may  believe  that  his  work  was 
far  more  generally  read  than  the  broader  lucu- 
brations of  Tacitus,  from  the  fact  that,  a century  and  a half 
later,  an  emperor  who  deduced  his  lineage  from  the  historian, 
provided  for  the  annual  transcription  of  ten  copies  of  his 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


243 


writings.1  Books  that  were  in  general  request  would  have 
stood  in  no  need  of  suck  patronage.  And  though  we  owe, 
perhaps,  to  this  exceptional  care  the  descent  of  a large  por- 
tion of  this  author’s  works  to  our  own  day,  we  still  have  to 
regret  that  they  did  not  possess  enough  interest  for  the 
generations  to  which  they  were  addressed,  to  he  preserved 
entire  for  our  instruction.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Caesarean 
lives  of  Suetonius  have  come  down  to  us  entire,  or  with  the 
loss  of  one  or  two  pages  only ; nor  have  they  ever,  perhaps, 
wanted  some  curious  readers  throughout  the  long  course  of 
seventeen  centuries. 

It  is  plain,  from  the  date  of  his  birth,  that  Tacitus  must 
have  enjoyed  opportunities  of  personal  communication  with 
the  survivors  of  the  darkest  period  of  the  mon-  Popnlarity  of 
archy,  and  have  been  himself  a witness  to  the  ^^in^under 
ghastly  profligacy  of  the  Neronian  principate.  Trajan- 
His  lofty  style  and  thorough  command  of  language  bespeak 
his  familiarity  with  men  of  rank  and  breeding,  and  though 
his  birth  was  not  illustrious,  his  father  may  have  been  the 
procurator  of  that  name  of  Lower  Germany  recorded  by  the 
elder  Pliny.2  It  was  the  position  of  his  family,  rather  than 
his  own  literary  merits,  that  led  him,  step  by  step,  through 
the  career  of  ofiice  to  the  consulship.  Under  Trajan  all  the 
works  known  positively  to  be  his  were  composed.  Two  01 
three  slight  notices  of  his  position  at  Rome,  and  his  fame 
there,  are  preserved  in  the  letters  of  Pliny ; 3 but  whether  he 
survived  the  chief  he  so  much  admired,  and  under  whose 
patriotic  sway  he  ventured  to  prefer  his  charges  against  the 
imperial  monarchy,  we  are  unable  to  determine.4  This  hap- 
py reign  was  distinguished  by  the  prosecution  of  Domitian’s 
creatures,  and  of  the  wretches  who  had  disgraced  the  period 

1 Vopiscus,  in  Tacit.  10.  2 Plin.  Hist.  Hat.  vii.  16. 

s Plin.  Epist.  ii.  1.,  iv.  IS.,  vii.  20.,  ix.  23. 

4 Bahr,  Gesch.  der  JRcem.  Liter,  ii.  130.,  refers  to  the  critics  who  have  ven- 
tured to  conjecture  that  Tacitus  survived  both  Pliny  and  Trajan,  and  lived  to 
the  middle  of  the  reign  of  Hadrian.  In  the  absence  of  any  authority  to  thi» 

effect  I think  it  unnecessary  to  examine  the  subject. 


244 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


of  blood  and  pride  now  closed  for  ever.  All  tongues  were 
unloosed ; domestic  archives  were  unlocked ; history,  so  long 
chained  or  gagged,  awoke  to  freedom,  and  became  by  a sud- 
den reaction  the  common  utterance  of  the  age.1 2  As  might  be 
expected,  there  was  no  more  ordinary  subject  of  historical 
composition  at  this  time  than  that  which  gave  widest  scope 
to  the  writers’  passions,  as  well  as  to  their  rhetorical  talent, 
the  sufferings,  namely,  of  their  country.  Thus  C.  Fannius 
wrote  a special  woi’k  on  the  victims  of  Nero,  of  which  he 
left  three  volumes  at  his  decease.3  Titinius  Capito  composed 
an  account  of  the  Deaths  of  Famous  Men , and  recited  each 
melancholy  story  to  excited  listeners  among  their  children 
and  friends.3  Such  publications  contributed  to  exasperate 
recollections  already  too  painful  to  be  recorded  without 
malice  or  prejudice ; and  we  may  well  believe  that  the  hor- 
rors of  the  baleful  period  so  recently  passed  away,  were 
coloured  by  the  painters  with  more  than  their  genuine  black- 
ness. If,  however,  the  historian  traced  the  narrative  of 
earlier  events  not  from  contemporary  anecdote  merely,  but 
from  published  sources,  he  was  bound  to  approach  them  with 
caution  and  discrimination.  The  official  records  of  those 
times  were  doubtless  extremely  meagre,  nor  would  they  be 
the  less  open  to  suspicion  of  falsification  in  all  important 
matters,  such  as  wars,  treaties,  and  alliances.  The  incidents 
of  private  oppression  and  suffering,  which  fill  the  foremost 
place  in  .he  domestic  annals  we  possess  of  the  empire,  would 

1 Plm.  Epist.  y.  8. : “ suades  ut  historian!  seribam,  et  suades  non  solus : 

multi  hoc  me  ssepe  monuerant Historia  quoquo  modo  scripta  delectat.” 

Vitruvius  had  said  the  same  long  before : “ historise  per  se  tenent  lectores.” 
Architect,  prasf.  lib.  v. 

2 Plin.  Epist.  v.  5.  Nero  appeared  to  him  in  a dream,  perused  the  three 
books  deliberately,  and  then  vanished.  The  author  presaged  from  this  vision 
that  he  should  write  no  more  than  the  emperor  had  read.  He  died,  and  the 
work  remained  unfinished. 

3 Plin.  Epist.  viii.  12. : “ scribit  exitus  illustrium  virorum,  in  iis  quorundam 
mihi  carissimorum.”  They  referred  evidently  to  the  martyrdoms  of  recent 
tyranny.  Capito  venerated  the  images  of  the  Bruti,  the  Cassii,  and  the  Catos. 
Epist.  i.  17. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


245 


Ibe  concealed  or  extenuated,  and  leave  the  fewest  traces  in 
public  documents.  Accredited  history  of  these  times  there 
was  none.  From  Augustus  to  Xero,  and  perhaps  later,  con- 
temporary writers  had  shrunk  from  the  composition  of  his- 
tory, or  their  works  had  been  seized  and  destroyed.  But  the 
place  of  grave  and  responsible  authorities  had  been  supplied 
by  a mass  of  private  anecdotes,  repeated  from  mouth  to 
mouth,  which  circulated  in  the  depths  of  domestic  privacy, 
but  rarely  floated  to  the  surface,  while  they  gathered  form 
and  consistence  in  the  ready  wit  and  prurient  imaginations 
of  a discontented  society.  Every  noble  family  had  its  own 
dark  rumours,  its  own  versions  of  the  circumstances  attending 
the  death  or  exile  of  its  most  honoured  members.  These 
stories  tended  to  enhance  the  universal  horror  of  the  tyrant 
in  whose  hands  the  issues  of  life  and  death  had  lain,  and  the 
kindlier  reminiscences  of  his  friends  and  favourites  would  be 
overborne  by  the  greater  number  and  vehemence  of  injurious 
libels.  From  their  position,  from  their  temptations,  from 
their  own  special  training,  or  want  of  training,  it  is  but 
too  probable  that  Tiberius,  Caius,  Xero,  and  Domitian  were 
really  monsters  of  profligacy  and  cruelty ; but  if  we  carefully 
weigh  the  evidence  against  them,  it  is  still  a question  how 
much  of  it  could  be  fairly  admitted  in  a court  of  justice. 
Most  of  the  adverse  witnesses  are  manifestly  interested,  and 
the  influences  under  which  Tacitus  more  especially  wrote,  as 
an  admirer  of  Trajan,  a partisan  of  the  great  houses,  a 
theorist  and  a satirist,  above  all,  perhaps,  as  an  artist  in 
composition,  studious  of  effects  in  rhetoric  and  painting, 
were  hostile  to  candour  and  sobriety.  Roman  history  ended, 
in  fact,  nearly  as  it  had  begun,  in  the  private  memorials  of 
the  nobles,  adapted  to  declamatory  recitation  by  their  flat- 
terers and  clients. 

It  was  under  great  disadvantages,  as  regarded  his  ma- 
terials, that  Tacitus  compiled  the  annals  of  the  Caesars ; but 
there  was  another  obstacle  to  a true  portraiture  Wai,t  ofacrin 
of  the  times,  in  the  want  of  a critical  spirit,  com-  Mstoncai  writ- 
mon  to  his  age,  and  indeed  generally  prevalent  ina 


246 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


in  the  best  periods  of  Roman  literature.  The  Romans  were 
carefully  trained  to  precision  in  style ; they  enjoyed  the  use 
of  a literary  language  which  acknowledged  but  one  dialect ; 
the  inflexions  and  syntax  of  the  Latin  tongue  were  the  same, 
wherever  spoken  by  men  of  education,  from  the  Tagus  to  the 
Euphrates.  It  is  commonly  said,  indeed,  that  the  Latin  lan- 
guage is  adapted  only  to  a limited  range  of  subjects ; but 
there  is  surely  a fallacy  in  this  remark.  The  sub- 

combined  with  . J 

acute  criticism  jects  to  which  it  was  actually  applied  within  the 
classical  period  are  limited  in  number  and  charac- 
ter, and,  accordingly,  classical  authority  is  wanting  for  forms 
and  phrases  invented  in  the  later  times  to  meet  the  expansion 
of  the  human  intellect : but  with  due  allowance  for  such  ne- 
cessary modifications,  it  may  be  said  of  Latin  that  no  vehicle 
of  thought  has,  in  fact,  been  more  widely  or  variously  em- 
ployed. Latin  has  been,  and  still  often  is,  adopted  as  the 
means  of  communication  on  themes  of  moral  and  natural 
science,  of  philosophy  and  religion,  of  mathematics  and  poe- 
try, of  law,  history  and  oratory.1  All  these  subjects  and  oth- 
ers may  still  be  treated,  and  still  are  sometimes  treated,  through- 
out the  civilized  world,  in  that  comprehensive  dialect  which  was 
spoken  by  Cicero  and  Tacitus,  which  has  never  ceasedtobe  read 
and  written  for  2000  years.  It  combines  precision  with  terseness, 
strength  with  grace,  expressiveness  with  fluency,  beyond,  as  I 
believe,  any  other  language ; and  it  was  upon  these  qualities, 
accordingly,  that  the  minds  of  the  Romans  were  fixed,  and  to 
the  attainment  of  these  their  efforts  were  directed.2  They  be- 

1 Comp.  Cicero,  De  jin.  bon.  et  mal.  i.  3.:  “non  est  omnino  hie  docendi 
locus  : sed  ita  sentio,  Latinam  linguam  non  modo  non  inopem,  ut  vulgo  putant, 
sed  locupletiorem  etiam  esse  quam  Grascam.  Quando  enim  nobis,  vel  dicam 
aut  oratoribus  bonis,  aut  poetis,  postea  quidem  quam  fuit  quod  imitarentur, 
ullus  orationis  vel  copiosae  vel  elegantis,  oraatus  defuit  ? ” 

2 Seneca  contrasts  ( Consol . ad  Polyb.  21.)  the  force  of  the  Latin  with  the 
gracefulness  of  the  Greek  language : “ quamdiu  steterit  aut  latinte  linguaa 
potentia,  aut  Grascee  gratia  ; ” and  the  contrast  is  no  doubt  generally  just.  It 
may  be  observed,  further,  that  in  his  time  the  full  elegance  of  Latin  had  not 
yet  been  developed  by  the  writers  of  the  Flavian  period. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


247 


came,  almost  without  exception,  as  far  as  their  remains  allow 
us  to  judge,  the  most  accurate  speakers  and  writers  of  any 
people  in  the  world.  No  ingen uity  can  reduce  to  the  logic 
of  syntax  all  the  eccentricities  of  JEschylus  and  Thucydides 
among  the  Greeks,  while  of  the  best  of  our  own  classics  there 
are  few  perhaps  that  do  not  abound  in  grammatical  solecisms. 
But  the  acutest  criticism  can  hardly  detect  a flaw  in  the 
idioms  of  Cicero  or  Livy,  Virgil  or  Horace,  and  even  the  most 
careless  of  the  Latin  poets  and  historians  can  rarely  he  con- 
victed of  an  error  in  construction.  It  is  curious,  however,  to 
observe  how  this  habitual  accuracy  deserted  the  Homans, 
when  they  came  to  dwell  on  the  substance  of  things  instead 
of  the  outward  modes  of  expression.  To  the  value  of  a criti- 
cal examination  of  facts  they  seem  to  have  been  almost  in- 
sensible. Destitute  of  our  mechanical  means  of  verification 
by  notes  and  references,  the  use  they  make  of  their  authorities 
is  correspondingly  loose  and  trivial.  The  historian,  who  was 
not  required  to  guard  every  statement  by  clear  and  direct 
testimonies,  was  easily  led  to  read  carelessly,  to  quote  from 
memory,  and  at  random.  Conscious  that  he  could  not  he  fol- 
lowed to  his  sources,  and  convicted  of  misusing  them,  he 
could  scarcely  resist  the  temptation  to  pervert  or  gloss  the 
truth.  Falsehoods  advanced  for  the  credit  of  the  nation  or 
of  particular  families,  met  with  ready  indulgence ; the  habit 
of  falsification  once  acquired,  could  not  he  kept  within  the 
bounds  ostensibly  prescribed;  rhetorical  amplifications  slid 
swiftly  into  direct  misstatements ; the  reputation  of  a great 
name  gave  currency  to  a lie ; the  critics  of  the  age  of  Quin- 
tilian, the  great  age  of  Roman  criticism,  lynx-eyed  in  detect- 
ing the  abuse  of  a figure  of  rhetoric  or  grammar,  lacked  the 
training  required  for  the  correction  of  an  error  in  fact,  or  for 
weighing  evidence.  Roman  criticism  might  be  the  tact  of  a 
spectator  in  the  circus,  but  it  was  not  the  acumen  of  a judge 
on  the  tribunal. 

We  may  ascribe  perhaps  to  this  carelessness  in  regard  to 
history,  the  undue  preference  of  the  Romans  for  biography. 


248 


HISTORY  OF  TnE  ROMANS 


The  sketch  indeed  of  an  individual  life  may  be 

The  preference  . . J 

of  the  Romans  worked,  as  we  have  sometimes  seen  m our  own 

for  biography.  . 

day,  into  the  most  elaborate  picture  of  the  events, 
characters,  and  manners  of  a whole  generation.  But  a taste 
for  biography  is  much  more  commonly,  and  among  the  Ro- 
mans it  seems  to  have  been  uniformly,  a taste  for  mere  per- 
sonal anecdote.  It  resulted  perhaps  universally  in  a perver- 
sion of  historical  truth,  a distortion  of  shape  and  proportions, 
if  not  an  absolute  misrepresentation  of  facts.  Biography, 
however,  was  in  favour  with  the  Romans  from  the  dawn  of 
their  literature,  and  in  the  Flavian  period  it  began  to  assume 
a predominance  over  every  other  form,  till  it  finally  super- 
seded both  history  and  poetry.  The  last  remains  we  possess 
of  classical  Latinity  are  the  biographies  of  the  later  emperors, 
collected  under  the  title  of  the  Augustan  History.  But  the 
chief  writer  of  this  class  belongs  to  the  period  now  before  us, 
and  his  works  are  of  great  interest  and  value. 

Suetonius : . 

Lives  of  the  The  lives  of  the  first  six  Csesars  by  Suetonius  con- 
stitute  some  of  the  most  important  contributions 
we  possess  to  our  collection  of  reputed  facts  in  history.  Those 
of  the  sis  which  followed  are  slighter  and  less  attractive,  the 
descent  from  the  former  series  to  the  latter  showing  how 
much  the  author  depended  on  written  sources,  and  how  much 
he  was  at  a loss  for  materials  when  he  approached  his  own 
times,  the  account  of  which  was  still  chiefly  to  be  gathered 
from  hearsay.  This  circumstance  is  important  for  estimating 
the  value  of  his  book,  and  on  the  whole  it  enhances  our  idea 
of  the  reliance  we  may  place  on  it.  But  the  biographical 
form  of  composition  affords  too  much  temptation  to  the  indo- 
lence common  at  the  period,  and  to  the  love  of  effect  not  less 
common  ; nor  does  Suetonius  indeed  pretend  to  be  a narrator 
of  events.  He  notes  the  salient  features  of  his  hero’s  charac- 
ter, and  illustrates  them  with  an  abundance  of  amusing  and 
striking  stories,  referring  only  incidentally  and  obliquely,  if 
at  all,  to  the  transactions  of  his  public  career.  Hence  the 
meagreness  of  the  details  that  can  now  be  given  of  the  Fla- 
vian reigns,  compared  with  the  Julian  and  Claudian,  in  wliicl 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


249 


we  can  use  the  capricious  portraiture  of  Suetonius  to  com- 
plete the  regular  narratives  of  Tacitus  and  Dion.  Nor  is  it 
in  the  connexion  of  historical  details  only  that  we  feel  the 
slightness  of  our  materials.  The  biographers,  while  fixing 
their  eyes  on  the  lineaments  of  their  proper  subject,  overlook 
the  general  circumstances  and  tendencies  of  the  age.  Our 
view  of  society  in  the  background  is  obstructed  by  the  bulk 
of  the  imperial  person,  occupying  the  whole  field  of  vision. 
The  Lives  of  the  Roman  biographers  are  wholly  deficient  in 
these  comprehensive  pictures.  They  can,  indeed,  only  be  re- 
garded as  heaps  of  crude  material  amassed  by  labourers  more 
or  less  intelligent,  and  disposed  more  or  less  in  order  for 
future  application  to  a work  of  symmetry  and  grandeur. 
But  the  master-builder  never  came,  and  the  materials,  thus 
variously  collected,  have  been  for  the  most  part  dispersed 
and  lost : the  fragments  now  remaining  in  the  pages  of  Sue- 
tonius and  his  successors,  as  well  as  in  Victor,  Xiphilin  and 
Eutropius,  can  hardly  furnish  forth  a mere  frame  or  outline 
of  the  palace  of  imperial  history. 

The  free  intercourse  between  men  of  equal  rank  which 
characterized  the  republic,  continued  with  little  diminution 
under  the  emperors.  The  strength  of  the  im- 

.,  . , , . . , „ . Collection  of 

penal  system  resided  perhaps  in  the  tact,  that  private  con-e- 

the  nobles,  the  dangerous  classes  of  the  capital  iponcknCL- 
who  might  have  nursed  an  explosive  spirit  of  discontent  in 
private,  could  not  retrain,  notwithstanding  their  fear  of  spies 
and  informers,  from  congregating  in  the  baths  and  theatres, 
or  in  hardly  less  public  circles  at  home,  thus  betraying  their 
habits  and  thoughts  without  disguise  to  the  jealous  master  who 
watched  them.  The  spirit  of  biographical  narration  which 
distinguishes  Roman  literature,  sprang,  no  doubt,  from  the  gre- 
gariousness of  Roman  life.  Reserved  and  self-controlled  as 
he  showed  himself  in  the  tribute  of  regard  or  reminiscence  he 
inscribed  on  the  tomb  of  his  associate,  the  Roman  indulged 
in  all  the  fulness  of  description  and  anecdote  in  the  volume 
he  consecrated  to  his  glory.  V ery  many  of  the  leading  men 
at  Rome  wrote  their  own  lives.  An  instinct  of  vanity,  the 


250 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


citv/ard  show  of  which  they  curbed  sedulously  in  themselves 
and  ridiculed  in  others,  impelled  them  to  leave  a minute 
record  of  their  deeds,  coloured  as  they  themselves  wished,  for 
posterity.  Their  longing  for  posthumous  fame  exceeded  even 
their  anxiety  for  honour  or  power  during  life.  The  cynical 
Sulla  could  relinquish  the  dictatorship,  but  he  could  not 
refrain  from  leaving  his  own  panegyric  behind  him.  On  the 
whole,  the  chief  aim  of  Roman  literature  at  this  period  was 
to  realize  the  image  and  character  of  the  men  who  belonged 
to  it.  Biography  was  applicable  to  a few  personages  of  dis- 
tinction only ; but  satire  and  epigram  were  at  hand  to  drag 
the  most  obscure  to  light,  or  to  merge  every  personal  feature 
in  general  pictures  of  society.  For  more  refined  tastes  satis- 
faction might  be  provided  by  collecting  the  letters  of  men 
who  had  filled  a space  in  the  public  eye,  and  attracted  the 
curiosity  of  their  own  circle.  The  correspond- 

The  letters  of  J . . 

Pliny  the  ence  of  the  younger  1 liny  occupies,  accordingly, 
younger.  . , , ... 

an  important  place  among  the  existing  documents 
of  the  age.  It  gives  the  fullest  and  fairest  portrait  we  pos- 
sess of  a Roman  gentleman ; nor  indeed  does  any  other  of 
the  ancients  come  so  near  as  its  writer  to  our  conception  of 
the  gentleman  in  mind,  breeding,  and  position. 

Pliny  was  born  of  an  honourable  stock,  belonging  to  the 
old  Csecilian  house,  which  was  now  widely  extended.  He 
t f was  adopted  by  the  most  learned  of  public  men, 
puny  the  liis  uncle  Pliny  the  naturalist.1  Under  these 
auspices  he  was  brought  up  in  all  the  learning  of 
his  times,  to  which  he  assiduously  devoted  himself ; but  his 
bent  was  rather  to  the  public  exercise  of  his  gifts  than  to  the 
accumulation  of  learning  for  its  own  sake,  and  he  obtained 
an  early  footing  on  the  ladder  of  ofiBce,  and  in  the  arena  of 
forensic  activity.  The  jurisconsult  might  still  retain,  at  least 


1 The  name  of  C.  Plinius  Csecilius  Secundus  betokens  a change  in  family 
nomenclature  which  became  established  about  this  time.  At  an  earlier  period 
we  should  have  read  it  Plinius  Caecilianus.  It  seems  that  the  longer  form  in  — 
anus  had  now  become  so  common  that  it  ceased  to  be  employed  to  indicate 
adoption. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


251 


among  the  highest  class,  something  of  his  old  character  as  s 
patron,  obliged  by  his  nobility , rather  than  a hired  advocate. 
Pliny  entered  with  zest  into  the  traditional  idea  of  this  hon- 
ourable relation,  and  if  he  accepted  splendid  fees,  in  acknowl- 
edgment of  his  services,  took  them  always  in  the  name  of 
justice,  and  as  he  believed,  in  the  cause  of  equity.1  It  was 
his  pride  to  emulate  the  great  pleaders  of  the  commonwealth, 
in  the  defence  of  injured  provincials,  or  the  arraignment  of 
delators ; and  the  state  of  affairs  under  Nerva  and  Trajan 
afforded  scope  for  the  exercise  of  this  honourable  ambition.2 
He  succeeded  in  turn  to  the  chief  magistracies,  which  he  tried 
in  vain  to  imagine  something  more  than  a shadow  of  their 
former  importance ; and  he  governed  the  province  of  Bithy- 
nia  after  the  pattern  recommended  by  the  humane  protector 
of  the  Sicilians,  the  accuser  of  the  tyrant  Yerres.3 4  But  Pliny 
emulated  his  master  Cicero,  though  at  an  immeasurable  dis- 
tance, in  the  pursuit  of  literature  also.  He  was  proud  to  be 
known  as  the  friend  of  Tacitus,  and  was  elated  with  a par- 
donable vanity,  when  a provincial  newly  arrived  conversing 
with  him  by  chance  on  the  benches  of  the  Circus,  exclaimed : 
Is  it  Tacitus  or  Plinius  I have  the  honour  of  addressing  f* 

1 The  subject  of  the  advocate’s  remuneration  has  been  treated  of  before. 
I will  repeat  here  that  the  clients  of  the  older  time  had  resented  the  payment 
of  fees  to  their  patrons  as  savouring  too  much  of  a tribute  from  the  plebs  to 
the  patriciate.  (Liv.  xxxiv.  4.)  This  objection  had  been  confirmed  by  the 
Cincian  law  (a.  u.  649),  and  the  advocate  had  been  forbidden  to  accept  pre- 
payment for  his  services  : but  neither  law  nor  custom  prevented  the  gratitude 
of  the  client  from  overflowing  in  a present  after  the  suit  was  over.  Such  was 
the  theory  of  Roman  legal  practice  at  this  time,  and  the  prastor  Licinius  Nepos 
insisted  on  enforcing  it.  An  amusing  letter  of  Pliny’s  ( Epist . v.  21.)  describes 
how  this  interference  was  canvassed.  Trajan  confirmed  it  with  an  edict. 

2 Plin.  Epist.  ii.  11,  12.,  iii.  9.,  iv.  9.  The  writer  dilates  upon  the  part  he 
took  in  pleading  the  cause  of  the  Africans  against  Marius  Priscus,  and  the 
Bseticans  against  Cascilius  Classicus,  and  again  in  defending  Julius  Bassos 
against  the  accusation  of  the  Bithynians. 

3 The  letter  in  which  Pliny  gives  advice  to  his  friend  about  the  government 
of  a province  is  written  evidently  in  imitation  of  Cicero’s  well-known  epistle  to 
Quintus.  Epist.  viii.  24. 

4 Plin.  Ep.  ix.  23. 


252 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


Pliny  may  at  this  time  have  been  favourably  known  already 
as  the  author  of  the  Panegyric , but  the  character  of  his 
friend’s  genius  had  not  yet  been  stamped  by  the  publication 
of  the  Histories  or  Annals. 

The  glimpses  Pliny  gives  us  of  his  aristocratic  correspond- 
ents are  not  less  interesting  than  the  details  of  his  own  life 
pitny’s  distin-  and  habits.  From  him  we  learn  almost  all  we 
andcorrespond-  know  of  Tacitus,  who  seems  to  have  resided  in 
ents-  lettered  leisure  in  the  city.  Pliny  makes  us 

acquainted  with  Silius  Italicus,  the  refined  and  wealthy 
versifier,  with  Passienus  Paulus,  an  imitator  of  his  ancestor 
Propertius,  with  Caninius  Rufus  who  sang  the  Dacian  war, 
with  Pomponius  Saturninus,  distinguished  alike  in  history, 
oratory  and  poetry ; and  he  quotes  with  satisfaction  the 
praises  of  himself  in  a well-known  epigram  of  Martial,  whose 
compliments  he  rewarded  with  a present  on  his  return  to  his 
native  Bilbilis. 1 He  introduces  us  to  the  society  of  the 
Greek  x-hetoricians,  such  as  Euphrates,  Isaeus,  and  Artemido- 
rus,  who  kept  themselves  decoi’ously  in  the  background 
among  the  men  of  letters  in  the  capital,  though  it  was  by 
these  accomplished  strangers,  probably,  that  the  best  literary 
circles  were  inspired,  and  by  them  that  the  aids  both  of  elo- 
quent speaking  and  graceful  living  were  taught  and  recom- 
mended.3 But  second  only  to  theirs  was  the  influence  of  the 
brave  and  noble  women,  the  Fannias  and  Arinas,  the  Corel- 
lias,  the  Calpurnias,  the  Celei'inas,  the  Calvinas,  who  main- 
tained in  a degenerate  age  the  antique  virtues  of  Roman 
iuteresting  or  matronhood.3  ISTor  are  thei’e  wanting  in  Pliny’s 
jectfofgmany  sketches  of  character  descriptions  of  another 
of  his  letters.  kind;  as  of  the  vanity  of  the  wretched  Regulus, 
the  creature  of  Domitian,  suffered  by  Rerva’s  lenity  to  parade 


1 Plin.  Epist  j.  16.,  ii.  8.,  iii.  7.,  v.  17.,  ix.  22.  I have  mentioned  a few 
only  of  the  literary  names  in  the  circle  of  Pliny’s  acquaintance.  The  epigram 
of  Martial  on  Pliny  is  x.  19.  of  the  poet’s  collection.  Plin.  Epist.  iii.  21.  The 
whole  number  of  the  writer’s  correspondents  is  not  less  than  113. 

3 Plin.  Epist.  i.  10.,  ii.  3.,  iii.  11.,  and  others. 

8 Plin.  Epist.  iii.  11.  16.,  iv.  17.,  vi.  24.,  vii.  11.  19.,  ix.  13.,  and  others 
Calpumia  (Epist.  iv.  19.)  was  Pliny’s  second  wife. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


253 


his  ill-gotten  riches  among  better  men,  and  even  seek  by  vil 
lainous  arts  to  increase  them ; 1 * of  the  attack  on  Lartius 
Macedo  by  his  own  slaves,  and  the  terrible  vengeance  of  the 
law ; a of  the  sentimental  dolphin  who  was  crossed  in  love  on 
the  coast  of  Africa ; 3 of  the  haunted  house  at  Athens,  curious 
as  the  exact  counterpart  of  a modern  ghost  story,  and  show- 
ing how  in  ancient  as  in  modern  times,  the  instincts  of  super- 
naturalism emerged  from  the  prevalent  realism  of  the  day.4 
But  none  perhaps  of  these  interesting  letters  are  so  valuable 
for  the  insight  they  give  us  into  life  and  feelings  as  those 
which  describe  the  writer’s  country-seats  ; or  relate  how  the 
accomplished  Yestricius  Spurinna  and  the  elder  Pliny  passed 
their  time  in  composition  or  study,  or  how  he  himself  diver- 
sified his  literary  leisure  with  rural  amusements.  Of  the  cor- 
respondence with  Trajan  I have  already  spoken. 

rm  • ■ i i „ -A, . , His  eorrespon- 

lhe  impression  these  letters  give  us  oi  Pliny  s deuce  with  Tra- 
character  is  extremely  favourable.  It  represents  JJU' 
him  a man  of  ability  and  accomplishments,  of  honour  and 
humanity,  kind  to  his  slaves,  considerate  towards  his  associ- 
ates, of  genial  habits,  charmed  with  the  attractions  of  domestic 
life,  of  moral  simplicity  and  picturesque  scenery,  liberal  in 
his  tastes,  generous  in  feeling.  "With  such  claims  on  our 
regard  and  even  admiration,  we  may  excuse  the  extrava- 
gance of  his  devotion  to  a virtuous  prince,  and  his  readiness 
to  flatter  those  whose  flattery  he  doubtless  expected  in 
return.  Though  the  letters  which  thus  amiably  depict  him 
were  published  by  himself,  and  many  of  them  written  with  a 
view  to  publication,  they  enable  us  to  appreciate  fairly 
enough  the  writer’s  claim  to  our  regard. 


1 Plin.  Epist.  i.  5.,  ii.  20.,  iv.  2.,  vi.  2. 

* Plin.  Epist.  iii.  14.  The  family  of  slaves  were  put  to  death  without  wait- 
ing for  the  fatal  result  of  the  attack  which  did  not  follow  till  afterwards : 
“ ipse  paucis  diebus  segre  refocillatus  non  sine  ultionis  solatio  decessit,  ita  vivus 
vindicatus  ut  occisi  solent.” 

8 Plin.  Epist.  ix.  33. 

4 Plin.  Epist.  vii.  2 7. : “ velim  scire,  esse  aliquid  phantasmata  . . . putes 
Ego  ut  esse  credarn  in  primis  eo  ducor,  quod  audio  accidisse  Curtio  Rufo.” 


254 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


Pliny’s  letters  give  us  our  nearest  view  of  the  ideas  and 
habits  of  the  Roman  aristocracy,  and  they  show  in  a remark* 
w , , able  manner  how  finely  the  speculative  opinions 

Mutual  approx-  J 1 r 

imation  of  the  of  the  day  were  actually  shaded  into  one  another. 

sects  or  philoso-  * J 

phy.  The  stoics  When  we  read  of  the  antagonistic  tenets  of  the 

and  Epicureans.  . . _ . , , „ 

Stoics  and  itpicureans,  and  hear,  not  from  poets 
and  satirists  only,  but  from  grave  historians,  such  as  Tacitus, 
of  the  strong  features  which  marked  their  consistent  profess- 
ors, when  we  know  that  Yespasian  and  Domitian  issued 
special  edicts  against  the  disciples  of  Chrysippus  and  Cato, 
and  are  led  to  suppose  that  these  men  were  in  some  way 
actively  hostile  to  the  government,  it  is  not  without  surprise 
that  we  remark  in  the  pages  of  Pliny  now  before  us,  how 
little  distinctive  there  seems  really  to  have  been  in  the  tem- 
per and  notions  of  the  Stoics  compared  with  other  educated 
citizens.  At  all  times,  under  every  form  of  government,  men 
will  be  divided  into  those  who  take  life  seriously  and  try  to 
follow  a rule  and  embody  an  idea,  and  the  larger  number 
who  swim  with  the  stream  and  merely  seek  to  extract  enjoy 
ment,  without  too  great  an  effort,  from  the  position  in  which 
they  find  themselves.  It  is  probable,  indeed,  that  in  the 
darkest  ages,  and  under  the  worst  tyrants,  this  difference  of 
character  was  more  prominent,  and  did  actually  effect  some 
outward  severance  between  the  members  of  the  Roman 
aristocracy ; but  undoubtedly,  as  soon  as  the  pressure  of  per- 
secution was  relaxed,  the  profession  of  Stoicism  dwindled 
to  a few  trifling  formalities,  and  it  was  again  by  natural 
temper,  not  by  creeds  and  tenets,  that  men  were  distinguished 
from  one  another. 

The  letters  of  Pliny  abound  in  instances  of  self-murder,  a 
practice  which  at  this  time  may  almost  be  dignified  with  the 
name  of  a national  usage.  Nothing,  however. 

Prevalence  of  , , , ° . ’ 

suicide  at  this  would  be  more  erroneous  than  to  suppose  that 
period'  this  was  a principle  of  the  Stoics,  or  was  the  dis- 

tinguished practice  of  the  sect.  Suicide,  in  the  view  of  their 
professed  teachers,  was  barely  excusable  in  the  last  resort, 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


255 


when  1 here  plainly  remained  no  other  escape  from 

1 J . „ . Suicide  not  a 

a restraint  which  denied  to  man  the  object  ot  his  principle  of  the 
existence.  Cato  persuaded  himself  that  he  could 
not  serve  his  own  moral  being  under  the  rule  of  a despot ; 
but  this  was  allowed,  even  on  his  own  principles,  to  he  a per- 
verse and  extravagant  view ; and  his  example,  effective  as  it 
proved  in  gaining  imitators,  was  followed  by  the  Epicurean 
Cassius  as  devoutly  as  by  the  Stoic  Brutus.  From  that  time, 
while  the  practice  of  self-immolation  became  more  and  more 
frequent,  it  seems  to  have  been  more  commonly  affected  by 
the  selfish  and  wilful  men  of  pleasure,  than  by  the  austere 
votaries  of  virtue  under  whatever  nominal  profession.  But 
the  true  and  consistent  disciples  of  the  Porch,  whether  they 
protested  openly,  at  all  hazards,  against  the  tyranny  of  the 
times,  or  constrained  themselves  to  the  public  service  in  sul- 
len submission  to  it,  refused  to  flee  from  the  bondage  in  which 
they  lay  by  the  subterfuge  of  the  coward  and  the  voluptuary. 
We  need  not  pass  too  austere  a judgment  on  the  sick  and 
aged  who  thus  courted  present  relief  from  suffering,  and  even 
made  their  escape  from  a painful  existence  with  a show  of 
dignity  and  fortitude.  But  we  must  guard  ourselves  against 
confounding  such  ordinary  mortals  with  the  genuine  patriots 
and  sages,  who  proved  themselves  generally  superior  to  this 
morbid  intemperance.  Pliny,  indeed,  betrays  a certain  ad- 
miration for  the  courage  of  these  persons,  many  of  whom 
were  of  the  number  of  his  own  friends ; but  we  may  believe 
that  the  true  philosophers,  such  as  Cornutus,  Thrasea  and 
Helvidius,  would  have  held  them  in  little  honour. 

. . Nor  practised 

The  fashion,  for  such  it  evidently  became,  was  as  an  escape 

. , . " . „ from  tyranny. 

the  result  of  satiety  and  weariness,  or,  at  best,  of 

false  reasoning ; but  the  fact  that  suicide  was  nev  er  so  rife 


as  under  the  beneficent  sway  of  Trajan,  shows  that  it  was  by 
no  means  the  resource  of  political  indignation,  chafing  against 
its  prisou-bars,  which  it  has  been  so  commonly  represented. 

bfor  is  it  the  habit  of  suicide  itself  that  marks  the  age  and 
the  people  so  strikingly,  as  the  mode  in  which  it  is  accom- 


256 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


Bnicide  of  plished,  the  publicity,  the  solemnity,  and  even 
Coreiiius  the  ostentation  that  attend  it.  I have  just  suf- 
fered  a great  loss , writes  Pliny : my  friend  Co - 
rellius  JRufus  is  dead , and  by  his  own  act , which  embitters  my 
sorrow.  No  death  is  so  much  to  be  lamented  as  one  that 

comes  not  in  the  course  of  fate  or  nature Coreiiius , 

indeed , was  led  to  this  resolve  by  the  force  of  reason , which 
holds  with  philosophers  the  place  of  necessity , although  he  had 
many  motives  for  living , a sound  conscience , a high  reputa- 
tion and  influence  ; not  to  mention  a daughter , a wife , a 
grandson , sisters,  and  true  friends  besides.  But  he  was  tor- 
tured by  so  protracted  a malady , that  his  reasons  for  death 
outweighed  all  these  advantages.  For  three  and  thirty  years, 
as  I have  heard  him  declare,  he  had  suffered  from  gout  in 
the  feet.  The  disorder  was  hereditary  with  him.  . . . In  the 
vigour  of  life  he  had  checked  it  by  sobriety  and  restraint ; 
when  it  grew  worse  with  increasing  years,  he  had  borne  it 
with  fortitude  and  patience.  I visited  him  one  day,  in  Do- 
mitian’s  time,  and  found  him  in  the  greatest  suffering  ; for  the 
disease  had  now  spread  from  the  feet  through  all  his  limbs. 
His  slaves  quitted  the  room,  for  such  was  their  habit  when- 
ever an  intimate  friend  came  to  see  him  / and  such  was  his 
wife’s  practice  also,  though  she  could  have  kept  any  secret. 
A fter  casting  his  eyes  around,  he  said,  Why  do  you  suppose 
it  is  that  I continue  so  long  to  endure  these  torments  ? I 
would  survive  the  ruffian  just  one  day.  Had  his  body  been 
as  strong  as  his  mind,  this  wish  he  would  have  effected  with 
his  own  hand.  God  granted  it,  however,  and  when  he  felt 
that  he  should  die  a free  man,  he  burst  through  all  the  lesser 
ties  that  bound  him  to  life.  The  malady,  which  he  had  tried 
so  long  to  relieve  by  temperance,  still  increased : at  last  his 
firmness  gave  way.  Two,  three,  jour  days  passed,  and  he  had 
refused  all  food.  His  wife,  Hispulla , sent  our  friend  Gemi- 
nius  to  me,  with  the  melancholy  news  that  her  husband  had 
resolved  to  die,  and  would  not  be  dissuaded  by  her  prayers  or 
her  daughter’s : I alone  could  prevail  upon  him.  I flew  to 
him.  I had  almost  reached  the  spot,  when  Atticus  met  me 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


257 


from  Hispulla , to  say  that  even  I could  not  note  prevail , so 
fixed  had  become  his  determination.  To  his  physician , in- 
deed, on  food  being  offered  to  him,  he  had  said,  I have  de- 
cided ; an  expression  which  maTces  me  the  more  regret  him, 
as  I the  more  admire  him.  I thinlc  to  myself,  What  a friend, 
what  a man  have  I lost!  He  had  completed,  indeed,  his 
sixty-seventh  year,  an  advanced  age  even  for  the  most  ro- 
bust : yes,  I Jcnow  it.  He  has  escaped  from  his  long-pro- 
tracted illness  : 1 know  it.  He  has  died,  leaving  his  dearest 
friends  behind  him,  and  the  state,  which  was  still  dear  to  him, 
in  prosperity.  This,  too , I know.  Nevertheless,  I lament 
his  death,  no  less  than  if  he  were  young  and  vigorous  ; I la- 
ment it — do  not  think  me  weak  in  saying  so — on  my  oion 
account.  For  I have  lost,  yes,  I have  lost  a witness  of  my 
own  life,  a guide,  a master.  In  short,  I will  say  to  you,  as 
I said  to  my  friend  Oalvisius,  I fear  I shall  myself  live  more 
carelessly  for  the  future.1 2 

Another  letter,  of  similar  character,  relates  to  the  death  of 
Silius  Italicus,  the  patrician,  the  consular,  the  poet  and  man  of 
letters.  Pliny  hears  that  this  noble  personage  had  of  gi]in3 
starved  himself  in  his  villa  at  ISTeapolis.  The  cause  Italicu5- 
of  his  death  was  ill  health  • for  he  suffered  from  an  incurable 
tumour,  the  irksomeness  of  which  determined  him  to  hasten 
his  end  with  unshaken  resolution .a  Of  another  distinguished 
contemporary,  the  jurisconsult  Aristo,  the  same  writer  re- 


1 Plin.  Epist.  i.  12. 

2 Plin.  Epist.  iii.  7.  The  writer  speaks  with  great  respect  of  this  man, 
whose  habits  were  not  unlike  his  own.  But  Silius  had  incurred  the  charge  of 
subservience  to  Nero  : “ lseserat  famam  suam  sub  Nerone ; credebatur  sponte 
accusasse.”  He  had  recovered  his  character  by  his  honest  bearing  under 
Vitellius,  and  had  gained  approbation  for  his  conduct  in  the  government  of 
Vsia  : “ maculam  veteris  industrise  laudabili  otio  abluerat.  Fuit  inter  prineipes 
civitatis  sine  potentia,  sine  invidia.  Salutabatur,  colebatur:  multumque  in 
lectulo  jacens  cubiculo  semper,  non  ex  fortuna  frequenti,  doctissimis  sermonibus 
dies  transigebat,  cum  a scribendo  vacaret.  Scribebat  carmina  majore  eura 
quam  ingenio.”  Here  Pliny  seems  to  refer  not  to  the  epic  poem  of  the 
“ Punica,”  written  long  before,  but  to  the  copies  of  verses  Silius  was  in  the 
habit  of  composing  in  his  old  age. 


258 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


cords,  that  he  had  desired  him,  with  other  intimate  friends 
to  demand  of  the  physicians  whether  his  malady  was  really 
incurable ; for,  if  so,  he  would  manfully  terminate  his  own 
existence.  Were  there,  however,  any  reasonable  prospect  of 
relief,  he  would  endure  it  with  fortitude,  however  obstinate 
and  tedious ; for  so  he  had  promised  his  wife  and  daughter ; 
and  he  felt,  moreover,  under  an  obligation  to  his  friends,  not 
to  frustrate  their  wishes  by  a voluntary  death,  if  there  were 
any  hope  for  him.  This , says  Pliny,  I consider , more  than 
usually  difficult  and  praiseworthy.  For  to  rush  upon  death 
with  impetuosity  and  ardour  is  common  to  many  • but  to 
deliberate  about  it , and  discuss  the  arguments  for  it  and 
against  it,  and  live  or  die  accordingly , is  worthy  of  a great 
mind.  And  the  doctors , it  seems,  do  give  us  hopes.  May  the 
Gods  confirm  them,  and  relieve  me  at  least  from  this  anxiety, 
which,  when  I am  rid  of,  I shall  return  to  my  Laurentine 
villa,  to  my  papers  and  tablets  and  literary  leisure .' 

The  resolution  of  the  men  was  rivalled  by  that  of  the 
women  also,  and  was  supported  apparently,  in  either  case, 

more  by  natural  force  of  character,  and  innate 

Suicide  pre-  . ...  . 

vailed  among  daring,  than  by  any  training;  m speculative  pln- 

tlie  women.  , , J ° „ P . , 1 .„ 

losophy.  Ihe  illustrious  deed  of  Arna,  the  wife 
of  Psetus,  who,  when  her  husband  was  sentenced  for  conspir- 
ing with  Scribonianus,  gave  herself  the  first  blow,  and 
handed  him  the  dagger,  with  the  words,  It  is  not  painful, 
was,  it  seems,  no  act  of  sudden  impulse,  but  the  accomplish- 
ment of  a deliberate  resolution  not  to  survive  him.  While 
his  fate  was  yet  doubtful,  she  had  intimated  this  intention  to 
her  relatives,  and  they  had  tried  in  vain  to  dissuade  her. 
To  Thrasea,  her  son-in-law,  who  had  asked  whether  she 
would  wish  her  own  daughter  thus  to  sacrifice  herself  in  the 
event  of  his  decease.  Yes,  assuredly,  she  had  replied,  if  she 
shall  have  lived  as  long  and  as  well  with  you,  as  I have  lived 
with  my  Pcetus.  When  accordingly  they  kept  a stricter 
watch  over  her,  to  prevent  the  execution  of  her  design,  she 


1 Plin.  Epist.  i.  22. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


259 


had  loid  them  that  their  precautions  were  fruitless.  You  can 
make  me  die  shockingly , she  had  said,  but  you  cannot  prevent 
my  dying  : and  therewith  she  had  leapt  from  her  seat,  and 
dashed  her  head  violently  against  the  wall.  Stunned  and 
bruised,  she  exclaimed  on  recovering,  I told  you  that  I would 
find  a way  to  death , however  painf  ul,  if  you  refused  me  an 
easy  one.1  The  admiration  Piiny  expresses  for  this  fierce- 
minded  creature,  whose  memory  was  treasured  in  the  hearts 
of  her  family,  shows  in  what  honour  the  suicide  even  of 
women  was  held,  in  the  dislocation  of  the  true  moral  sense 
among  the  Romans  of  the  period.2 

Had  indeed  the  feeling  which  prompted  these  acts  of  self- 

sacrifice  been  the  result  merely  of  speculative  opinions  about 

virtue  and  duty,  it  would  have  caused  little  un- 

. This  proneness 

easiness  to  the  tyrants.  But  indicating,  as  it  to  suicide  not 

. J ~ the  result  of 

really  did,  a contempt  of  life,  and  recklessness  of  speculative 

personal  consequences,  it  might  alarm  them  with  ' pmi0U!>‘ 
a sense  of  their  own  insecurity.  Hence  the  distress  of  Tibe- 
rius at  the  fatal  resolution  of  Cocceius  ISTerva ; hence  the 
visit,  the  enquiries,  the  intreaties  to  abstain  from  it,  and 
lastly,  the  avowal  that  the  suicide  of  a distinguished  guest 
of  the  palace,  with  no  obvious  motive,  would  be  injurious  to 
the  prince’s  reputation.3  The  emperors  readily  imagined 
that  the  men  who  held  their  own  lives  in  so  little  estimation 
might  at  any  moment  cast  them  on  the  die  of  revolt  or  as- 
sassination, and  they  conceived  that  there  was  no  way  to 
disarm  such  fanatical  hostility,  but  to  divert  it  from  the  con- 
templation of  high  and  generous  objects  by  the  grossest. 

1 Plin.  Epist.  iii.  16.  Compare  another  notable  case  of  perverted  principle 
(vi.  24.).  A couple  of  mature  years,  long  married,  dwelt  in  a villa  on  the  banks 
of  the  lake  Larius.  The  man  suffered  from  a distressing  malady : the  wife 
assured  herself  that  it  was  incurable,  told  him  that  there  was  nothing  for  him 
but  to  kill  himself,  promised  that  she  would  not  desert  him,  tied  herself  to  him, 

and  tumbled  with  him  into  the  water. 

3 A painful  illustration  of  this  proneness  to  suicide  in  women  occurs  in  the 
case  of  Paulina  the  wife  of  Seneca.  Tac.  Ann.  xv.  60. 

3 Tacitus,  Ann.  vi.  The  story  has  been  already  referred  to  in  chapter  xlvi 
of  this  history. 


260 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


dissipation.  This  was  the  snare  into  which  the  discontented 
nobles  too  easily  fell.  They  escaped  from  the  fatigue  of 
public  affairs,  which  had  lost  their  redeeming  interest,  in  a 
round  of  sensual,  or  at  best  of  idle  pleasures,  and  cloaked 
their  dereliction  of  duty  as  citizens  under  the  name  of  philoso- 
phy, which  should  have  taught  them  another  lesson.  They 
made  it  the  aim  of  their  lives  to  cultivate  inward  satisfac- 
tion, a good  conscience,  as  they  sententiously  entitled  it,  by 
keeping  jealously  out  of  sight  those  worthy  ends  of  existence 
which,  under  their  circumstances,  were  difficult,  perhaps  im- 
possible to  attain.  Their  eclectic  philosophy,  whether  it 
took  the  name  of  the  Porch,  the  Garden,  or  the  Academy, 
was  generally  the  parade  of  rhetorical  axioms  on  the  uncer- 
tainty or  vanity  of  life,  and  the  superiority  of  the  truly  wise 
to  all  earthly  distresses,  such  as  vex  the  souls  of  ordinary 
mortals.1 

This  aping  of  the  ancient  wisdom  was  the  common  fashion 
of  the  day  among  the  polished  classes  of  society;  but  it 
Voluptuous-  might  be  combined  with  almost  any  mode  of 
uessofthearse'  l^'e>  suc^  as  ™ many  cases  little  deserved  associ- 
times-  ation  with  it.  The  increasing  splendour  of  the 

shows  and  contests,  gymnastic  or  literary,  encouraged  by 
the  patronage  of  the  prince  himself,  began  to  fascinate  the 
Roman  magnate,  who  at  an  earlier  period  would  have  aban- 
doned these  frivolous  enjoyments  to  the  Greeks,  their  invent- 
ors and  introducers.2 3  Both  Pliny  and  Tacitus  attended  the 
spectacles  of  the  circus,  which  Cicero  and  even  Seneca  would 


1 Comp.  Statius,  Sylv.  ii.  2.  129. : 

“Nos  vilis  turba  caducis 
Deservire  bonis,  semperque  optare  parati, 

Spargimur  in  casus ; celsa  tu  mentis  ab  arce 
Despicis  errantes,  humanaque  gaudia  rides.” 

But  the  sage,  who  thus  despised  all  worldly  gratifications,  looked  down 
upon  the  world  from  the  fairest  paradise  in  the  Surrentine  hills. 

3 Lucan,  Fhars.  vii.  270. : 

“ Graiis  delecta  juventus 
Gymnasiis  aderit,  studioque  ignava  palsestrffi.” 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


261 


have  regarded  as  a weakness,  perhaps  as  a disgrace.1  But 
such  recreations  were  innocent  compared  with  the  gross 
sensualities  in  which  the  great  too  often  indulged,  with  the 
words  of  Plato  and  Chrysippus  on  their  lips.2 3  The  pleasui’es 
of  the  hath  and  table  attained  a solemn  recognition  from  the 
men  of  letters  and  philosophy.  The  revived  attractions  of 
the  camp  and  military  service  exercised  also  a marked  effect 
on  the  forms  of  society.  The  coarse  licence  of  the  tent  or 
the  trenches  penetrated  into  the  halls  and  gardens  of  the 
Italian  noble.  Beneath  the  loose  flowing  garb  of  the  forum 
a moral  restraint  had  been  concealed,  which  was  completely 
thrown  off  under  the  pressure  of  the  cuirass,  and  to  which, 
after  a long  period  of  indulgence  abroad,  it  was  difficult 
again  to  submit  at  home.  The  literature  of  the  The  tone  of 
times  suggests  to  us  pictures  of  the  rude  pre-  rupt^dby^he 
sumption  of  tribunes  and  centui’ions,  who  cor-  Boldiei7- 
rupted  the  tone  of  polite  society  in  which  they  affected  to 
mingle  on  equal  terms.  Trajan  himself,  who  had  passed 
most  of  his  days  among  soldiers,  had  his  carouses  and  boon 
companions,  and  the  fashion  set  by  princes  has  more  influence 
on  the  mass  of  their  subjects  than  the  example  of  recluse 
philosophers.  From  this  period  we  discover  a marked  de- 
cline in  the  intellectual  character  of  the  Roman  people. 
Though  the  names  of  historians,  poets,  and  orators  continue 
to  abound  in  our  records,  they  become  little  better  than 
empty  sounds  ; for  their  works  have  almost  wholly  perished, 
and  we  can  only  account  for  this  general  disappearance  by 
the  trifling  estimation  they  retained  after  the  lapse  of  a single 
generation.  But  the  Flavian  period  still  did  honour  to  the 
ennobling  influence  of  letters.  The  extent  to  which  many  of 

1 Plin.  Epist.  ix.  23.  Tacitus  attended  tlie  Circensian  games.  I have  re- 

ferred in  chapter  xli.  to  the  unfavourable  opinions  of  Cicero  ( Tusc . Bisp.  ii.  17.) 
and  Seneca  (Be  brev.  vit.  13.). 

3 Juvenal  ii.  4. : 

“ Quamquam  plena  omnia  gypso 
Chrysippi  invenies.” 

Comp.  Martial,  i 25.,  vii.  58.  Quintil.  Instil.  Orat.  prooem.  L 


262 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


the  noblest  citizens  were  influenced  by  a genuine  taste  for 
acquiring  knowledge  is  striking  and  affecting.  It  shows  how 
strongly,  in  default  of  the  highest  objects  of  human  interest, 
of  religious  aspirations  and  political  ambition,  all  the  powers 
of  the  mind  may  be  engrossed  by  any  subject  which  deals 
with  thoughts  and  feelings  common  to  our  nature.  Thus  it 
was  also  that  composition,  still  confined  as  strictly  as  ever  to 
the  highest  ranks,  became  among  them  the  employment  of 
many.  Though  the  greater  number  of  these  lordly  scribblers 
may  never  have  given  their  productions  to  the  public,  nor 
even  recited  them  to  their  own  acquaintances,  the  habit  of 
reading,  extracting,  and  annotating  seems  to  have  spread 
widely,  and  to  have  formed  a regular  part  of  existence 
throughout  a distinguished  circle. 

The  manner  in  which  Vestricius  Spurinna,  an  active  pub- 
lic officer  iu  the  prime  of  life,  a diligent  student  in  old  age, 
Habits  of  the  spent  the  days  of  his  dignified  retirement,  may 
^^intelligent  be  noted  as  an  example  of  the  habits  of  his  class, 
nobkf. U Ex-  ^ know  not  that  I ever  passed  a pleasanter  time , 

vestricius  says  Pliny>  than  lately  with  Spurinna  / there  is 

Spurinna.  indeed  no  man  I should  so  much  wish  to  resemble 
in  my  own  old  age , if  I am  permitted  to  grow  old.  Nothing 
can  he  finer  than  such  a mode  of  life.  For  my  part,  I like  a 
well-ordered  course  of  life,  particularly  in  old  men,  just  as  1 
admire  the  regular  order  of  the  stars.  Some  amount  of  ir- 
regularity and  even  of  confusion  is  not  unbecoming  in  youth  / 
hut  everything  should  he  regidar  and  methodical  zoith  old  men, 
who  are  too  late  for  labour,  and  in  whom  ambition  would  he 
indecent.  This  regularity  Spurinna  strictly  observes,  and  his 
occupations , trifling  as  they  are  (trifling,  that  is,  were  they 
not  performed  day  by  day  continually ),  he  repeats  as  it  were 
in  a circle.  At  dawn  he  keeps  his  bed ; at  seven  he  calls  for 
h is  slippers ; he  then  walks  just  three  miles,  exercising  his 
mind  at  the  same  time  with  his  limbs.  If  friends  are  by,  he 
discourses  seriously  with  them  ; if  not,  he  hears  a book  read ; 
and  so  he  does  sometimes  even  when  friends  are  present,  if 
it  be  not  disagreeable  to  them.  He  then  scats  himself. \ and 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


2«3 


more  reading  follows , or  more  conversation , which  he  likes 
better.  By  and  by  he  mounts  his  carriage , taking  with  him 
his  wife , a most  admirable  woman , or  some  friends , as  my- 
self  for  instance , the  other  day.  What  a noble , what  a charm- 
ing tete-a-tete ! h ^o  much  talk  of  ancient  things ; what 
deeds , what  men  you  hear  of  / what  noble  precepts  you  im- 
bibe, though  indeed  he  refrains  from  all  appearance  of  teach- 
ing. Returning  from  a seven-mile  drive , he  walks  again  one 
mile  ; then  sits  down  or  reclines  with  the  stylus  in  his  hand. 
For  he  composes  lyrical  pieces  with  elegance  both  in  Greek 
and  Latin.  Very  soft , sweet  and  merry  they  are , and  their 

charm  is  enhanced  by  the  decorum  of  the  writer’s  own  habits. 
When  the  hour  of  the  bath  is  announced , that  is,  at  two  in 
summer,  at  three  in  winter,  he  strips  and  takes  a turn  in  the 
sun,  if  there  is  no  wind.  Then  he  uses  strong  exercise  for  a 
considerable  space  at  tennis  / for  this  is  the  discipline  with 
which  he  struggles  against  old  age.  After  the  bath  he  takes 
his  place  at  table,  but  puts  off  eating  for  a time,  listening  in 
the  meanwhile  to  a little  light  and  pleasant  reading.  All 
this  time  his  friends  are  free  to  do  as  he  does,  or  anything 
else  they  please.  Supper  is  then  served,  elegant  and  moderate, 
on  plain  but  ancient  silver.  Me  uses  Corinthian  bronzes  too, 
and  admires  without  being  foolishly  addicted  to  them.  Play- 
ers are  often  introduced  between  the  courses,  that  the  pleasures 
of  the  mind  may  give  a relish  to  those  of  the  palate.  He 
trenches  a little  on  the  night,  even  in  summer ; but  no  one 
finds  the  time  long,  such  are  his  kindness  and  urbanity 
throughout.  Hence  now,  at  the  age  of  sixty-seven , he  both 
hears  and  sees  perfectly  ; hence  his  frame  is  active  and  vigor- 
ous / he  has  nothing  but  old  age  to  remind  him  to  take  care 
of  himself . . . . Such , he  adds,  is  the  mode  of  life  to  which 
I look  forward  for  myself,  and  on  which  I will  enter  with 
delight,  as  soon  as  advancing  years  allow  me  to  effect  a re- 
treat. Meanwhile  I am  harassed  by  a thousand  troubles,  in 
which  Spurinna  is  my  consolation,  as  he  has  ever  been  my 
exampAe.  For  he  too,  as  long  as  it  became  him,  discharged 


264 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


duties , bore  offices , governed  provinces  / and  great  was  the 
labour  by  which  he  earned  his  relaxations 

Such  a mode  of  life  was  probably  not  uncommon,  and  im- 
plied no  special  devotion  to  literary  occupation.  Of  the  true 
man  of  letters  we  have  an  eminent  and  conspicu- 

The  true  man  . . 1 

of  letters.  . ous  example  m the  elder  Plmy  ; for  the  public 

functions  this  prodigy  of  assiduous  industry  dis- 
charged did  not  prevent  him  from  reading  and  writing  more 
unremittingly  and  more  copiously  than  perhaps  any  of  his 
contemporaries.  He  was  a man , says  his  nephew  emphati- 
cally, of  quick  parts,  of  incredible  industry , and  the  least  pos- 
sible sleep ? From  the  twenty-third  of  August  he  began  to 
study  at  midnight,  and  through  the  winter  he  continued  to 
rise  at  one , or  at  the  latest  at  two  in  the  morning,  often  at 
tioelve.3  Before  daybreak  he  used  to  go  to  the  emperor  ; for 
he  too  worked  at  night.  Thence  he  betook  himself  to  his  offi- 
cial duties.  On  returning  home  he  again  gave  what  time 
remained  to  his  studies.  After  taking  food,  which  in  the 
morning  was  light  and  digestible , as  in  the  olden  time,  he 
woidd  often  in  summer  recline  in  the  sun,  if  he  had  leisure. 
A book  teas  then  read  to  him,  on  which  he  made  notes , or  ex- 
tracted from  it.  He  read  nothing  he  did  not  extract  from. 
For  he  would  say  there  icas  no  book  so  bad  you  could  not  get 
some  good  from  it.  After  his  sunning  he  generally  took  a 
cold  bath  ; then  a slight  repast,  and  a very  little  sleep.  Then , 
as  if  beginning  a new  day,  he  studied  till  supper  time. 
During  supper  a book  was  read,  ami  notes  made  on  it  as  it 
went  on.  I remember  one  of  his  friends  once  stopping  the 
reader,  who  had  pronounced  a word  ill,  and  making  him  re- 

1 Plin.  Ep.  iii.  1. 

2 Comp,  the  elder  Pliny’s  account  of  himself,  Hist.  Nat.  praef. : “ occupati 
sutnus  officiis,  subcesivisque  temporibus  ista  curamus,  id  est  nocturnis.”  Sleep 
he  counted  among  the  infirmities  of  nature : “ profecto  enim  vita  vigilia  est.” 

3 Plin.  Episl.  iii.  5. : lucubrare  Vulcanalibus  (x.  Kal.  Sept.  i.  e.  Aug.  23.) 
incipiebat,  non  auspicandi  causa,  sed  studendi,  statim  a nocte  multa.”  “ Lucu- 
brare ” is  to  study  by  torch-light.  This  was  done  once  on  the  morning  of  the 
Vulcanalia  “ auspicandi,  i.  e.  boni  ominis  causa,”  but  the  practice  not  usually 
continued.  Pliny  persevered. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


205 


peat  it.  Did  you  not  understand  Mm?  said  my  uncle.  He 
admitted  that  he  had.  Why  then  did  you  stop  him?  We 
have  lost  ten  more  lines  by  this  interruption.  Such  a miser 
was  he  of  his  time.  He  rose  from  supper  in  summer  time  by 
daylight  / in  winter  before  seven  in  the  evening , as  regularly 
as  if  constrained  by  law.  This  was  his  mode  of  life  in  the 
midst  of  his  official  labours , and  in  the  turmoil  of  the  city. 
In  the  country  he  exempted  only  his  bathing  time  from  study. 
I mean  the  actual  use  of  the  bath  itself,  for  while  he  was 
being  rubbed  and  dried  he  woidd  listen  to  reading  or  himself 
dictate.  In  travelling  he  considered  himself  free  from  every 
other  care , and  gave  himself  entirely  to  study.  He  kept  a 
scribe  at  his  side  with  a book  and  tablets , whose  hands  in 
winter  were  armed  with  gloves , that  even  the  cold  weather 
might  not  rob  him  of  a moment  / and  with  this  view  he  used 
even  at  Tome  to  be  carried  in  a litter.  I remember  his  re- 
buking me  for  taking  a walk.  You  might  have  managed,  he 
said , not  to  lose  those  hours.  For  he  considered  all  time  lost 
which  was  not  given  to  study.  It  icas  by  this  intense  appli- 
cation that  he  completed  so  great  a number  of  books , and  left 
me  besides  a hundred  and  sixty  volumes  of  Extracts,  written 
on  both  sides  of  the  leaf  \ and  in  the  minutest  hand , so  as  to 
double  the  amount  . . . Woidd  you  not  think , on  remember- 
ing how  much  he  read  and  wrote , that  he  had  had  no  part  in 
affiairs,  nor  enjoyed  the  friendship  of  a prince?  And  again, 
when  you  hear  how  much  time  he  devoted  to  business,  would 
you  not  suppose  that  he  neither  read  nor  wrote  at  all  ? . . It 
makes  me  smile  when  people  call  me  studious,  for  idle  indeed 
am  I compared  with  him. 

The  habits  indeed  of  the  younger  Pliny  admitted  of  a 
greater  variety  of  interests,  and  the  practice  of  forensic  speak- 
ing required  him  to  mix  more  freely  in  society, 

° 1 , , . '.  Mode  of  liTe  of 

and  to  taxe  a larger  share  m the  ordinary  trans-  Pliny  the 

i.  i younger. 

actions  ot  lite.  During  part  ol  the  year  he  re- 
sided at  Rome ; for  some  months  annually  he  enjoyed  the 
combination  of  town  and  country  in  his  suburban  villa  at 
Laurentum,  whence  he  could  come  to  the  city  as  often  as 
127 


266 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


business  required.  But  lie  sometimes  indulged  himself  with 
a more  complete  change  of  scene  among  the  hills  of  Etruria, 
or  on  the  hanks  of  the  Larius,  in  his  oivn  native  region.1  In 
the  country  he  led,  according  to  his  own  account,  rather 
an  idle  life,  amusing  himself  with  field  sports ; hut  there  is 
something  still  more  pleasing  in  the  kindly  feeling  with 
which  he  interests  himself  in  the  concerns  of  his  neighbours 


and  fellow-townsmen,  providing  for  the  maintenance  of  their 
orphan  children,  erecting  a temple  at  his  own  expense  in  a 
country  village,  and  placing  in  the  sanctuary  of  his  own  na- 
tive town  a Corinthian  bronze,  too  choice  in  material  and 
workmanship  for  his  own  modest  altar.2  As  a man  high  in 
office,  and  a popular  advocate,  he  had  acquired  large  means, 
and  his  villas,  notwithstanding  the  professed  moderation  of 
his  tastes  and  expenses,  were  on  a scale  inferior  perhaps  to 
few.  The  minute  descriptions  he  has  left  of  them  are  among 
our  most  precious  documents ; and  may  aid  in  completing 
our  conceptions  of  Roman  domestic  life. 

Magnificence  in  the  exterior  of  private  dwellings  is  gener- 
ally a late  product  of  civilization,  and  the  Greeks  and  Ro- 
mans, who  lone:  disregarded  it  entirely,  attached 

Magnificence  , , , m , 

of  the  dwellings  to  the  last  but  a secondary  interest  to  it.  lo  the 

of  the  nobility.  . _ , , 

fafades  of  their  temples  they  gave  all  the  splen- 
dour  and  elegance  they  could  command,  for  the  temple  was  the 
visible  token  of  the  deity,  and  the  homage  paid  him  by  his 
worshippers  was  conducted  in  front  of  his  sanctuary,  while 
the  interior  cell  in  which  his  image  was  shrouded  was  for 
the  most  part  low,  dark,  and  narrow.  But  in  their  private 
residences  this  usage  was  originally  reversed. 
At  home  they  displayed  their  taste  and  luxury  in 
the  decorations  of  their  interiors,  while  in  their 
exterior  character  they  regarded  convenience 
only.  The  portico  was  indeed  a necessary  ad- 


The  Eoraan 
principle  of 
adorning  the 
exterior  of 
their  temples, 
but  the  interior 
of  their 
dwellings. 


1 Besides  his  Laurentinum  and  Tuscum  and  at  least  two  seats  on  the  lake 
of  Como,  Pliny  possessed  country  houses  at  Tusculum,  Praeneste  and  Tibur 
Epist.  v.  6.  45. 

* Plin.  Epist.  iil.  4.  6. ; iv.  1. ; vii.  18. ; x.  12.  Comp.  ix.  39. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


267 


junct  to  the  temple ; its  noble  span  was  first  invented  for  us« 
rather  than  for  ornament,  to  shelter  the  worshippers  who 
could  not  be  admitted  within  the  sanctuary,  and  this  neces- 
sity produced  in  the  progress  of  the  art  the  most  striking  and 
sumptuous  features  of  ancient  architecture.  But  the  grand 
columnar  vestibule  was  not  required  for  the  dwelling-house, 
and  accordingly  formed  no  part  in  the  ordinary  elevation 
of  a Roman  villa.  While,  on  the  other  hand,  the  temple  was 
a simple  edifice  of  limited  dimensions,  however  handsome  in 
its  proportions,  the  patrician  palace  extended  over  an  indefi- 
nite area,  and  comprized  an  endless  variety  of  parts,  which  it 
would  have  taxed  the  genius  of  the  greatest  architects  to 
combine  in  one  harmonious  design.  It  does  not  appear  in- 
deed that  any  such  attempt  was  made.  The 

1 . Yast  extent  of 

palace  of  tlie  Csesars  was  the  creation  of  a succes-  the  Roman 
sion  of  ambitious  builders,  who  threw  out  long 
colonnades  in  various  directions,  connecting  hall  with  hall, 
and  tower  with  tower,  without  plan  or  symmetry,  with  no 
view  to  unity  of  appearance  or  architectural  proportion. 
Such  was  the  Golden  House  of  1ST ero  ; and  hence  the  fitness 
of  the  common  comparison  of  a palace  to  a city,  a comparison 
sufficiently  just  among  the  Romans,  but  which  would  hardly 
occur  under  our  modern  habits.  The  emperor  alone  could 
command  so  vast  a space  within  the  walls  of  the  capital ; 
but  in  the  country  many  a wealthy  citizen  indulged  his  ideas 
of  comfort  and  magnificence  on  a scale  perhaps  not  less  ex- 
travagant, covering  broad  tracts  of  land  with  apartments  for 
every  purpose  of  life,  connected  with  porticos  and  open  clois- 
ters, and  enclosing  plots  of  garden  ground,  or  planted  at  the 
end  of  marble  terraces  or  alleys  of  box  and  planes,  wherever 
a favourite  view  could  be  commanded,  whether  near  or  dis- 
tant. The  Roman  villa,  in  the  later  acceptation  of  the  term, 
the  luxurious  summer  retreat  rather  than  the  residence  on 
the  farm  which  it  originally  signified,  was  placed  either  on 
the  sea-shore  or  among  the  hills,  for  the  sake  of  coolness ; 
and  its  arrangements  were  chiefly  devised  with  a view  to 


268 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


Pliny's  Lauren-  personal  comfort.  The  Laurentine  of  Pliny 
tine  villa.  faced  the  Tyrrhene  sea,  and  extended  in  one 
direction  only,  parallel  to  the  coast.  It  consisted  of  numer- 
ous rooms,  of  various  forms  and  dimensions,  and  designed 
for  various  uses,  united  by  open  galleries.  Most  of  these 
chambers  commanded,  as  may  be  supposed,  a sea  view,  and 
enjoyed  nearly  a southern  aspect.  Some  were  circular,  and 
looked  forth  in  all  directions ; others  semi-circular,  and 
screened  only  from  the  north ; others  again  excluded  the 
prospect  of  the  water,  and  almost  its  noises ; some  faced 
west,  some  east,  to  be  used  at  different  seasons,  or  even 
different  times  of  the  day.1  Behind  this  long  line  of 
buildings,  the  outward  appearance  of  which  is  nowhere  indi- 
cated, but  which  seems  in  no  part  to  have  risen  above  the 
ground-floor,  lay  gardens,  terraces,  and  covered  ways  for 
walking  and  riding ; and  among  these  were  placed  also  some 
detached  apartments,  such  as  we  might  call  summer-houses  ; 
while  still  further  in  the  rear  rose  the  primeval  pine-woods  of 
the  Latian  coast,  which  supplied  the  baths  with  fuel,  and 
formed  a chief  recommendation  of  the  locality.  The  Tuscan 
villa  of  the  same  proprietor  seems  to  have  been  more  ex- 
piiny’s  Tuscan  tensive,  and  even  more  elaborately  constructed. 
rilla-  Pliny’s  description  of  it  is  remarkable  for  the 

sense  it  shows  of  the  picturesque,  and  the  intimation  it  affords, 
that  not  himself  only,  but  others  of  his  class,  partook  in  no 
slight  degree  of  that  enjoyment  of  natural  scenery  which  is 
the  special  boast  of  our  own  age  and  country.  Pliny  takes 
great  pains  to  impress  on  his  correspondent  the  sylvan  beau- 
ties of  the  spot,  the  wide  range  of  plain  and  meadow  stretch- 
ing before  it  to  the  Tiber,  the  slope  of  leafy  hills  on  the 
skirt  of  which  it  lay,  the  massy  amphitheatre  of  the  Apen- 
nines behind  it ; and  it  is  not  till  he  has  expatiated  with 


Hume,  in  his  Essay  on  the  Populousness  of  Ancient  Nations , remarked 
that,  “ The  buildings  of  the  Romans  were  very  like  the  Chinese  houses  at  this 
day,  where  each  apartment  is  separated  from  the  rest,  and  rises  no  higher  than 
a single  story ; n a description  which  has  been  amply  confirmed  by  the  accounts 
of  the  imperial  summer  palace  beyond  the  walls  of  Pekin. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


269 


warmth  on  these  sentimental  attractions  that  he  refers  to  the 
eligibility  of  the  site  for  its  material  conveniences,  the  abun- 
dance of  wood,  the  fertility  of  the  soil,  the  serviceableness  of 
the  river,  navigable  in  winter  and  spring  for  barges,  to  con- 
vey its  produce  to  the  Roman  market.  The  account  of  the 
edifice  itself  is  similar  to  that  of  the  Laurentinum,  though  even 
more  complicated  in  its  details.  It  is  approached  by  a long 
portico,  leading  to  an  Atrium  or  central  hall,  sucb  as  form- 
ed the  nucleus  of  the  town-residence ; but  there  the  likeness 
ends,  for  whereas  in  the  house  at  Rome  all  the  living-rooms 
open  upon  the  atrium,  and  lie  compactly  arranged  within  the 
four  outer  walls,  in  the  villa  almost  every  apartment  is  sub- 
stantially independent  of  the  rest  and  only  slightly  connected 
with  them  by  suites  of  open  galleries.  The  Tuscum  seems  to 
have  abounded  also  in  gardens  and  plantations,  its  situation 
being  better  adapted  for  such  luxuries  than  the  sea-shore. 
But  neither  in  this  case  is  there  any  mention  of  the  exterior 
appearance,  nor  any  hint  that  the  reader  might  be  expected 
to  derive  pleasure  from  the  description  of  it.  It  is  evident 
that  an  architectural  design  did  not  enter  into  the  ideas 
either  of  Nero,  when  he  flaunted  over  Rome  with  his  palace 
of  palaces,  or  of  the  elegant  master  of  the  patrmian  villa  by 
the  sea  or  on  the  hill-side.1 

We  possess  another  description  of  a villa,  less  particular 
indeed,  but  hardly  less  vivid,  in  a very  animated  poem  of 
Statius.  The  pleasure-house  of  the  noble  Pollius  The  Surrentjne 
occupied  the  finest  spot  for  such  a luxury  that  villa  of  PoUius. 
all  the  Roman  dominions  could  offer.2  It  stood  on  the  sum- 
mit of  a low  promontory,  immediately  west  of  the  little  town 
of  Surrentum,  and  looked  in  a northerly  direction  across  the 
Campanian  Crater  to  Neapolis.  On  the  right  and  left  the 
shore  was  indented  by  two  small  bays,  in  one  of  which  tho 

1 Plin.  Epist.  ii.  It.,  v.  6. 

2 Statius,  Sylv.  ii.  2.  The  “ villa  Surrentina  of  Pollius  ” may  be  compared 
throughout  with  iii.  1.,  the  “ Hercules  Surrentinus,”  and  i.  3.,  the  “ villa  Tibur- 
tina  of  Vopiscus.”  Comp,  also,  on  a smaller  scale,  the  villa  on  the  Janiculum, 
Martial,  iv.  64.,  and  again  x.  30. 


270 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


stranger  who  came  by  sea  from  Naples, — sucb  is  the  poet’s 
description  of  his  own  arrival, — ran  his  bark  upon  the  beach. 
On  the  margin  of  the  water  he  encountered  a bath-house, 
furnished  with  double  chambers  for  the  salt  element  and  the 
fresh  ; for  at  this  point  a stream,  descending  from  the  hills, 
made  its  way  into  the  sea.1 2  A little  fane  with  a statue  of  Nep* 
tune,  fronted  and  defied  the  billows,  while  another  of  Herein 
les  faced  the  land,  and  seemed  to  guard  the  tranquil  retreat.3 
Statius  climbed  the  hill,  under  the  shelter  of  a colonnade, 
which  led  direct  to  the  villa,  and  reminded  him  of  the  ancient 
glories  of  the  covered  way  which  still  scaled  the  ascent  from 
Lechseum  to  Corinth.  The  villa  itself  occupied  a platform, 
and  was  divided,  like  those  before  described,  into  a long 
series  of  chambers,  facing  the  bay  of  Naples,  and  command- 
ing the  varied  line  of  coast  from  Stabke  to  Misenum,  with 
the  island  cliffs  of  Xnarime  and  Prochyta.  Of  these  cham- 
bers some  opened  to  the  south,  and  looked  landwards,  and 
in  these  the  resonance  of  the  surges  was  never  heard.3  These 
apartments,  and  the  terraces,  open  or  covered,  which  con- 
nected them,  were  adorned  with  painting  and  sculpture  in 
marble,  and  in  bronze  more  precious  than  gold,  the  effigies 
of  warriors,  poets  and  philosophers.  They  were  decorated, 

1 Stat.  Sylv.  ii.  2. : 

“ Gratia  prima  loci  gemma  testudine  fumant 
Balnea,  et  e terris  occurrit  dulcis  amaro 
Nympha  mari.” 

2 Stat.  1.  c. : “ gaudet  gemino  sub  numine  portus.  Hie  servat  terras,  hie 
SEEvis  flr.ctibus  obstat.”  The  Greeks,  and  their  imitators  the  Romans,  studied 
appropriateness  in  the  choice  of  statues  for  particular  localities.  Thus  Neptune 
was  suited  to  a temple  or  grotto  on  the  sea-shore ; Narcissus  to  a fountain,  &c 
Pausan.  ii.  25.  4. ; Callistratus,  5.  The  people  of  Alabanda  committed  a sole' 
cism  in  taste  when  they  placed  statues  of  advocates  in  their  gymnasium,  and 
of  wrestlers,  &c.,  in  their  forum.  Yitruv.  iii.  5. ; see  Feuerbach,  Der  Vatican, 
Apollo,  p.  179. 

3 Stat.  1.  c. : 

“ Haec  videt  Inarimen,  illi  Prochyta  aspera  paret  . . . 

H*c  pelagi  clamore  fremunt,  hac  tecta  sonoros 

Ignorant  fluctus,  terraque  silentia  malunt.” 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


271 


moreover,  with,  variegated  slabs,  much  loved  by  the  opulent 
and  magnificent,  from  the  quarries  of  Egypt,  Libya  and 
Phrygia.1  The  platform  occupied  by  the  house  and  its  pre- 
cincts was  artificially  prepared  for  them  by  scarping  the 
cliffs  and  levelling  the  inequalities  of  the  ground,  by  clearing- 
woods  in  one  place,  by  planting  groves  in  another,  till  the 
whole  might  be  compared  to  the  creation  of  an  Amphion  or 
an  Orpheus.2  This  much-laboured  site  was  sheltered  from 
the  winds  which  eddied  from  the  land  by  the  mountain 
range  here  projecting  from  the  Campanian  Apennines,  and 
gradually  descending  to  the  promontory  of  Minerva.  The 
slopes  were  planted  with  vines,  celebrated  for  their  strong 
and  generous  produce,  and  were  lost  at  last  in  level  corn- 
fields, which  extended  to  the  very  edge  of  the  waters,  and 
glistened  in  the  sun  with  the  spray  of  the  billows.3 

But  with  whatever  rapture  the  poet  expatiates  on  the 
prospect  from  these  terraces  and  windows,  he  has  no  word  for 
the  view  of  the  villa  itself  from  the  bay  or  land-  considerations 
ing-place,  the  view  on  which  his  own  eye  would  the^omansin 
naturally  rest  as  he  crossed  the  water  from  building,  &c. 
ISTeapolis.  In  a modern  description  of  such  a lordly  dwell- 
ing, the  elevation  of  the  house  would  be  the  first  object  of 
interest  to  the  spectator,  and  its  praise  the  most  acceptable 
compliment  to  its  owner.  Such  is  the  antagonism  between 
ancient  and  modern  feeling  on  these  subjects.  Our  noblest 
palaces  are  often  purposely  placed  where  the  prospect  is 
confined  to  the  depths  of  the  woods  attached  to  them.  We 
complain  that  the  ancients  betray  little  sense  of  the  pictur- 
esque in  landscape ; but  with  us  too  it  is  but  a recent 
practice  to  give  our  houses  the  command  of  an  extensive 

1 Stat.  1.  c. : 

“ Hie  Graiis  penitus  desecta  metallis  Saxa.” 

3 Stat.  1.  c. : 

“ Et  tu  saxa  moves,  et  te  nemora  alta  sequuntur.” 

* Stat.  L c. : 

“ Quid  nunc  ruris  opes,  pontoque  novalia  dicam 
Injecta,  et  madidas  Baccheo  nectare  rapes.” 


272 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


survey ; our  fathers  rather  chose  secui'e  and  sheltered  spots 
for  building,  and  delighted  more  in  the  palatial  front,  and 
towering  elevation,  as  beheld  from  without,  than  in  the 
varied  scenes  of  nature  which  opened  on  the  spectator  from 
within.  For  this  discrepancy  motives  might  readily  be  dis- 
covered in  differences  of  climate  and  even  of  national  dispo- 
sition. The  Romans  retained  to  the  last  a certain  simplicity 
of  taste  in  limiting  their  views  to  their  own  domestic  com- 
fort and  enjoyment,  rather  than  soliciting  admiration  from 
strangers.  In  their  dress  as  well  as  in  their  buildings,  in 
the  general  tenor  of  their  social  habits,  they  attach  more  im- 
portance to  personal  convenience  than  to  the  judgment  of 
their  neighbours.  Fleeing  from  the  painful  glare  of  the 
Italian  sun,  they  buried  themselves  in  vaults  beneath  the 
ground,  where  no  other  eyes  could  witness  their  indulgences. 
Such  are  the  chambers  still  remaining  beneath  the  surface  of 
the  Palatine,  which  belonged,  as  is  thought,  to  the  imperial 
residence ; such  were  the  apartments,  deeply  sunk  in  the 
basement  of  the  Baths  of  Titus,  whence  the  masterpieces  of 
ancient  art  were  drawn  forth,  never  before  revealed  to  the 
view  of  the  multitude.  The  Nymphsea,  or  bath-houses  of 
the  emperors  and  nobles  on  the  margin  of  the  Alban  Lake, 
were  sheltered  from  every  gaze,  though  doubtless  they  were 
decorated  internally  with  splendour  and  voluptuousness.  In 
quest  of  coolness  and  the  grateful  breeze,  the  patrician  thrust 
his  villa  upon  the  bosom  of  the  lake  or  ocean,  and  remains 
have  been  detected,  at  the  bottom  of  the  lucent 

Floating  palace  . 

on  the  lake  of  jSTemi,  of  a wooden  ship  or  ratt  oi  vast  dimen 
Noini  ^ ^ 

sions,  whereon  Trajan,  or  possibly  Tiberius,  con- 
structed a retreat,  furnished  with  every  luxury,  and  supplied 
by  pipes  with  the  living  waters  of  the  mountains.1 


1 Harehi  (Della  Architedura  MUitare,  1599)  relates  how  he  examined  with 
the  diving  bell  the  sunken  palace,  as  he  calls  it,  in  the  lake  of  Nemi.  Some 
fragments  have  been  raised,  and  are  now  preserved  in  the  museums  at  Rome. 
There  is  no  apparent  ground,  however,  for  his  conjecture  that  this  structure 
was  the  work  of  Trajan.  The  only  traces  of  inscription  about  it  record  the 
name  of  Tiberius.  See  Brotier’s  Notes  on  his  Supplement  to  Tacitus;  and 
G ell’s  Topography  of  Rome , &c.,  ii.  113. 


UNDER  THE  EJJPIRE. 


273 


The  view  of  society  presented  to  us  in  the  pages  of  Pliny, 
of  Statius,  and  even  of  Quintilian,  is  impressed  with  a char- 
acter of  feehle  elegance,  such  as  we  commonly  ^ , 

’ . Decline  of  en- 

connect  with  the  decline  of  a refined  civilization,  ergy,  and  ais- 

. . . . appearance  of 

The  voluptuous  indolence  m which  generation  salient  features 
after  generation  has  been  steeped,  seems  at  last  among  the  Eo- 
to  enervate  the  fibre  of  the  nation ; the  virtues 
and  the  vices  of  a decaying  society  betray  equally  the  de- 
parture of  the  energy  and  elasticity  which  marked  its  lusty 
maturity.  The  age  produces  no  more  great  deeds,  nor  great 
thoughts  ; its  very  crimes  are  stunted.  The  men  must  be 
measured  by  a lower  standard,  yet  fewer  than  of  old  will  be 
found  to  rise  above  it.  That  such  was  the  tendency  of  the 
times  cannot  be  denied : the  growth  of  human  nature  must 
ever  be  dwarfed  by  the  withdrawal  of  the  sun  of  liberty. 
The  tyranny  of  custom  and  fashion  was  more  effective,  per- 
haps, in  reducing  men  to  a vulgar  equality  in  tastes,  habits, 
and  opinions,  than  even  the  tyranny  of  a despotic  adminis- 
tration. The  progress  of  such  a decline  had  been  inevitable, 
at  least  from  the  age  of  the  Scipios.  But  the  movement  had 
been  hitherto  slow,  and  we  must  not  be  led  by  fallacious 
appearances  to  exaggerate  it.  If  we  remark  the  absence  of 
great  events  and  prominent  personages  from  the  epoch  before 
us,  the  defect  may  partly  be  ascribed  to  the  meagreness  of 
its  historical  remains.  In  Trajan  himself,  in  Agricola,  in 
Thrasea  and  Virginius,  we  catch  glimpses  at 

* . ’ . ° r Exceptional 

least  of  men,  who,  ll  painted  at  lull  length  m manliness  of 

, . . ’ ’ r . ■_  , „ _ ° . Trajan,  Agri- 

their  genuine  colours,  might  be  found  no  less  cola,  and  oth- 
interesting  specimens  of  human  nature  than  any 
of  the  heroes  of  the  republic.  What  is  lacking  however  in 
history,  may  be  supplied  in  part  from  the  writings  of  two  at 
least  among  the  most  conspicuous  of  our  public  teachers. 
Tacitus  and  Juvenal  are  both  of  them  thoroughly 

. ° J Manliness  of 

manly  ; they  are  hearty  in  their  loves  and  hates,  Tacitus  and 

, . . . . . , . , Juyenal. 

clear  m their  perceptions,  vigorous  m their  lan- 
guage, consistent  in  their  estimates  of  good  and  evil,  as 
men  might  be  who  lived  in  the  healthiest  and  most  bracing 


274 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


of  social  atmospheres.  The  strength  and  independence  of 
their  minds  might  befit  the  early  manhood  of  a people  des- 
tined to  effect  great  moral  conquests.  The  errors,  even  of 
Tacitus  and  Juvenal,  were  the  most  remote  from  those  of 
social  decrepitude,  which  is  generally  marked  hy  laxity  of 
moral  judgment,  indifference  to  national  honour,  and  sickly 
sentiment.  Of  the  estimation  in  which  the  historian  was 
held  we  have  some  account  in  the  letters  of  Pliny ; and 
though  we  have  no  token  of  Juvenal’s  reception  among  his 
contemporaries,  we  know  that  even  within  the  classical 
period  his  satires  became  the  theme  of  annotators  and  exposi- 
tors. We  may  conclude  that  the  age  which  could  appreciate 
writers  so  true  in  moral  feeling,  and  so  bold  in  expressing  it, 
was  not  destitute  of  other  men  of  the  same  stamp,  men  both 
of  energy  and  sensibility.  The  picture  of  society  they  drew 
is  indeed  sufficiently  frightful  ; nor  can  we  question  its 
general  fidelity.  But  the  criminals  they  lash  were  at  least 
no  milksops  in  crime,  no  fribbles  in  vice.  Their  tyrants  and 
hypocrites,  their  sensualists  and  parasites,  are  all  cast  in  the 
strong  mould  of  the  Roman  free-state.  They  are  genuine 
countrymen  of  Catilina  and  his  desperadoes,  of  Piso  and 
Verres,  of  Fulvia  and  Sempronia. 

Tacitus  and  Juvenal  may  be  appropriately  compared  for 
the  shrewdness  with  which  they  analyse  motives,  and  the 
Comparison  fierceness  of  their  indignation,  though  the  one  is 
tusMdnjriTe-"  compact,  concentrated,  and  even  reserved  in  the 
nal-  expression  of  his  passion,  the  other  vehement, 

copious  and  declamatory.  Both  have  the  same  definite  point 
of  view,  as  Roman  moralists  and  patriots.  But,  of  the  two, 
Tacitus  is  what  has  been  called  the  best  hater  ; he  is  the 
blinder  in  his  prejudices,  the  least  various  in  his  sympathies 
with  human  nature.  Tacitus  is  an  instance  of  what  we  regret 
sometimes  to  meet  with  among  men  of  ability  and  experience, 
the  increase  with  advancing  years  of  bitterness,  narrowness, 
The  bitterness  and  intolerance.  Like  our  own  political  philoso- 

of  Tacitus  in-  , . __  . . 

creases  as  he  pner  Burke,  iacitus  grows  more  acrid,  more 

years!ces  m morbid  in  temper,  even  to  the  last.  Little  as  we 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


275 


know  of  Ms  life,  we  may  trace  the  deepening  shade 
in  his  works,  though  we  have  reason  to  helieve  that  he  had 
not  even  the  excuse  of  personal  or  political  disappointment. 
In  the  Dialogue  on  Oratory,  his  earliest  utterance,  he  dis- 
plays a just  sense  of  the  evil  tendencies  of  Ms  day ; but  his 
rebuke  to  the  spirit  of  the  age  is  tempered  with  gentleness 
and  reserve,  and  shows  at  least  a disposition  to  appreciate 
every  element  of  good.  But  these  sympathies  speedily 
evaporate.  The  Agricola , while  professedly  a panegyric,  is 
in  fact  a scarcely  disguised  satire.  The  praises  of  the  hero 
are  two-edged,  and  every  stroke  dealt  in  his  honour  recoils 
with  a back-handed  blow  on  the  necks  of  his  contemporaries. 
The  Histories  abound  in  keen  discrimination  of  crimes  and 
vices,  and  in  burning  sarcasms  on  wickedness  in  high  places ; 
yet  even  in  the  Histories , the  dark  picture  of  sin  and  suffer- 
ing is  relieved  by  some  broader  views  of  incidents  and 
manners  ; the  moralist  remembers  sometimes  that  he  is  a 
historian,  and  seeks  to  delineate  in  its  salient  features  the 
general  character  of  the  times.  But  the  Annals , the  latest 
of  the  author’s  works,  the  most  mature  and  finished  of  his 
productions,  is  almost  wholly  satire.  Tacitus  rarely  averts  his 
eyes  from  the  central  figure  of  monstrous  depravity,  around 
which,  in  his  view,  all  society  is  grouped.  He  paints  the 
age  all  Tiberius,  or  all  Nero.  Like  the  Roman  soldier 
chained  to  his  own  prisoner,  he  finds  no  escape  from  the 
horrors  he  has  undertaken  to  delineate.  He  enjoys  no  relief 
himself,  and  he  allows  none  to  the  reader.  His  hatred  of  sin 
is  concentrated  in  hatred  of  the  sinner,  and  the  exasperation 
into  wMch  he  has  worked  himself  against  the  tyrant  over- 
flows at  last  in  bitterness  towards  the  age  with  which  he  has 
identified  Mm.  Of  such  a satire  no  good  can  come.  I can- 
not imagine  that  any  reader  of  the  Annals  was  ever  morally 
the  better  for  the  perusal.  Many  perhaps  have  been  made 
worse,  confirmed,  it  may  be,  in  a cyrncal  contempt  for  man- 
kind, or  in  a gloomy  despair  of  virtue. 

Of  the  life  of  Juvenal,  on  the  other  hand,  we  know  per- 
haps even  less  than  of  that  of  Tacitus.  The  traditions  or 


276 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


That  of  jnve-  fancies  of  the  scholiasts  and  anonymous  biogra* 
nai  diminishes.  p]1Grs  seem  to  be  wholly  untrustworthy.1  But 
if  we  may  take  the  order  in  which  the  Satires  are  delivered 
to  us  as  the  actual  order  of  their  composition,  we  may  derive 
from  them  a pleasing  insight  into  the  author’s  character. 
We  may  trace  in  him,  with  the  advance  of  years,  a fitting 
progress  in  gentleness  and  humanity.  By  comparing  a few 
passages  in  his  works,  we  may  fix  his  birth  in  the  year  59  ; 
the  composition  of  his  first  Satire  must  have  been  after  100, 
but  probably  not  long  after,  that  of  his  fifteenth  but  little 
later  than  119.  Accordingly,  Juvenal  wrote  from  about  his 
fortieth  to  his  sixtieth  year ; and  if  we  compare  the  earlier 
with  the  later  Satires,  we  find  a change  of  style  and  senti- 
ment aptly  corresponding  with  this  advance  in  age  and  ex- 
perience. Thus  we  notice  the  fierceness  and  truculence  more 
especially  of  the  first,  the  second,  the  fifth  and  sixth,  which 
are  all  aggressive  onslaughts  on  the  worst  forms  of  Roman 
wickedness.  The  third,  and  still  more  the  seventh,  betray  a 
tone  of  querulous  disappointment,  as  of  a man  who  had  failed 
of  the  aim,  of  his  life,  and  finds  himself,  when  past  the  middle 
age,  outstripped  by  unworthy  competitors,  and  neglected  by 
the  patrons  on  whom  he  had  just  or  imagined  claims.  But 
in  the  eighth,  the  tenth,  and  the  thirteenth,  the  nobility  of 
his  nature  reasserts  itself.  He  is  no  longer  the  mere  assailant 
of  vice,  still  less  is  he  a murmurer  against  fortune  : he  seeks 
to  exalt  virtue,  to  expound  the  true  dignity  of  human  nature, 
to  show  to  man  the  proper  objects  of  ambition,  to  vindicate 

1 The  statements  respecting  Juvenal’s  life  and  fortunes  in  the  pretended 
memoir  of  Suetonius,  the  notes  of  the  ancient  scholiast,  and  the  brief  refer- 
ence of  Sidonius  Apollinaris,  seem  to  be  mere  fancies.  The  cardinal  date  is 
that  in  Sat.  xiii.  17.,  which  professes  to  have  been  written  sixty  years  after  the 
consulship  of  Fonteius,  the  poet’s  birth  year.  Of  three  Fonteii  consuls  in  the 
first  century,  I cannot  doubt  that  C.  Capito  of  the  year  59  is  here  intended.  I 
presume  that  the  first  and  fourth  Satires  were  written  early  in  the  reign  of 
Trajan;  the  thirteenth  in  119,  at  its  close;  nor  does  there  seem  any  reason 
why  the  intervening  pieces  may  not  stand  in  the  order  of  their  composition 
The  fifteenth  was  also  written  under  Hadrian,  that  is  to  say  soon  after  the  con 
sulship  of  Junius,  a.  d.  119.  See  xv.  27. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


277 


the  goodness  and  justice  of  a divine  Providence.  The 
eleventh,  twelfth,  and  fourteenth  advance  yet  a step  further 
in  the  course  of  a good  man’s  life.  They  paint  the  charms 
of  simplicity  and  virtue ; they  glorify  contentment  of  mind 
and  friendship ; they  set  before  us,  with  all  an  old  man’s 
gentleness,  the  reverence  due  to  infancy  and  innocence.  The 
subject  of  the  fifteenth  is  a special  one,  and  there  is  some 
poverty  in  the  conception,  some  feebleness  in  the  execution 
of  it ; nevertheless,  it  breathes  the  true  spirit  of  humanity, 
and  if  we  regard  it  as  the  last  of  the  author’s  genuine  com- 

O O 


positions,  it  makes  a worthy  completion  to  a patriarch’s  mis- 
sion. The  satirist,  whose  aim  is  merely  negative  and  destruc- 
tive, who  only  pulls  down  the  generous  ideas  of  virtue  with 
which  youth  embarks  on  its  career,  is  simply  an  instrument 
of  evil ; and  if  his  pictures  of  vice  are  too  glowing,  too  true, 
the  evil  is  so  much  the  greater;  but  if  he  pauses  in  his  course 
to  reconstruct,  to  raise  again  our  hopes  of  virtue,  and  point 
our  steps  towards  the  goal  of  religion  and  morality,  he  may 
redeem  the  evil  tenfold.  The  later  satires  of  Juvenal  more 
than  compensate  for  the  earlier.  The  reader  who  studies 
him  with  this  clue  to  the  service  he  has  done  mankind,  will 
share,  I doubt  not,  the  reverential  gratitude  with  which  I am 
wont  to  regard  him. 


Tacitus  and  Juvenal  join  in  the  same  vigorous  protest 
against  the  vices  of  then-  age,  but  their  united  protest  against 
the  encroachment  of  foreign  ideas  and  senti-  -Tacitus  and 
ments,  if  less  loudly  and  plainly  expi'essed,  is  in  nentamonstha 
fact  not  less  vigorous.  With  these  illustrious  ^mputns  ofS 
names  closes  the  series  of  genuine  Roman  lit-  Roman  ideas, 
erature;  of  that  spontaneous  reflex  of  a nation’s  mind 
which  represents  its  principles  and  traditions.  The  later 
writers  in  the  Roman  tongue,  few,  and  for  the  most  part 
trivial,  as  they  are,  must  be  regarded  as  imitators  of  a 
past  from  which  they  have  become  really  'dissevered,  if 
they  are  anything  more  than  mere  compilers  and  antiqua- 
rians. But  no  Roman  writers  are  more  thoroughly  con- 
servative than  these  last  of  the  Romans.  In  them  we  see 


278 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


tlie  culmination  of  the  Flavian  reaction  against  the  threat 
ened  disintegration  of  society  which,  checked  more  than  once 
by  Sulla  and  Augustus,  had  still  advanced  stealthily  through 
three  centuries.  Tacitus  and  Juvenal  are  more  wholly  Ro- 
man than  even  Cicero  or  Yirgil.  They  maintain  the  laws, 
the  manners,  the  religion  of  their  fathers  with  more  decision 
than  ever,  as  they  feel  more  than  ever  how  much  protection 
is  required  for  them.  But  if  the  old  national  ideas  are  thus 
held  by  some  champions  more  strictly  than  ever,  the  sphere 
of  their  influence  has  no  doubt  become  even  narrower  than 
of  yore.  Rome  has  dwindled,  in  this  respect,  into  a provin- 
cial town  in  the  centre  of  her  own  empire.  The  ideas  of 
Athens  and  Alexandria,  of  Palestine  and  Asia  Minor,  exert 
their  sway  all  around  her,  and  are  gaming  ground  within  her 
walls.  The  emperor  and  his  senators,  the  remnant  of  the 
historic  families  of  the  city,  are  the  only  Romans  in  heart 
and  feeling  now  left  in  the  empire.  Already  the  emperor 
has  ceased  to  be  a Roman  by  birth ; he  will  soon  be  not  even 
a Roman  by  descent ; he  will  repudiate  Roman  principles 
with  the  scorn  of  ignorance,  perhaps  even  of  vanity ; the  di- 
voree  in  sentiment  between  the  emperor  and  his  nobles  will 
throw  him  more  and  more  into  the  arms  of  the  soldiery,  and 
end,  after  many  struggles,  in  his  open  renunciation  of  their 
religion  and  their  home.  But  in  order  to  understand  the  im- 
pending revolution,  we  must  now  turn  our  eyes  towards  the 
Eastern  provinces,  in  which  we  shall  again  follow  the  foot- 
steps of  Trajan,  the  last  years  of  whose  reign  were  spent  in 
great  military  and  political  combinations  in  that  quarter. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE 


279 


CHAPTER  LXY. 


GENERAL  EXPECTATION  OF  A DELIVERER  FAVOURED  BY  AUGUSTUS  AND  VESPASIAN.— 
REVIVAL  OF  JUDAISM  AFTER  THE  FALL  OF  JERUSALEM. THE  SCHOOLS  OF  TI- 
BERIAS.  NUMBERS  OF  THE  JEWS  IN  THE  EAST. — SEDITIONS  RAISED  AND  SUP- 
PRESSED.  THE  CHRISTIANS  REGARDED  WITH  SUSPICION  AS  A JEWISH  SECT. — 

ALLEGED  DECREES  OF  NERO  AND  DOMITIAN. PERSECUTION  IN  BITHYNIA,  AND 

LETTERS  OF  PLINY  AND  TRAJAN,  A.  D.  Ill  : A.  U.  864. — MARTYRDOM  OF  IGNA- 
TIUS.— THE  CHURCH,  THE  CANON,  AND  EPISCOPACY. TRAJAN’S  EXPEDITION  INTO 

THE  EAST,  A.  D.  114  : A.  U.  867. EARTHQUAKE  AT  ANTIOCH,  A.  D.  115. AN- 
NEXATION OF  ARMENIA. TRAJAN’S  CONQUESTS  BEYOND  THE  TIGRIS. OVER- 
THROW OF  THE  PARTHIAN  MONARCHY. TRAJAN  LAUNCHES  ON  THE  PERSIAN 

GULF. — IS  RECALLED  BY  DEFECTIONS  IN  HIS  REAR. — HIS  ILL  SUCCESS  BEFORE 

ATRA. HE  RETURNS  TO  ANTIOCH. HIS  ILLNESS  AND  DEATH  AT  SELINUS,  A.  D. 

117:  A.  U.  870. REVOLT  OF  THE  JEWS  IN  THE  EAST:  IN  CYPRUS,  CYRENE,  AND 

EGYPT. REVOLT  IN  PALESTINE. AKIBA  AND  BARCOCHEBAS,  LEADERS  OF  THE 

JEWS. — SUPPRESSION  OF  THE  REVOLT. — FOUNDATION  OF  THE  COLONY  OF  JELIA 
CAPITOLINA. FINAL  SEPARATION  OF  THE  CHRISTIANS  FROM  THE  JEWS. (A.  D. 

111-133:  a.  u.  864-886.) 


UGUSTUS  and  Vespasian,  with  tlieir  train  of  bards,  au- 


gurs, and  declaimers,  might  cling  in  hope  or  despair  to 
the  past,  and  strive  to  bind  the  wheels  of  human  General  ex_ 
thought  to  the  effete  traditions  of  the  Capitol.  &“werwSfe-  a 
Authority  and  Genius  might  perhaps  combine  t:o  ligand  v^s- 
restrain  the  aspirations  of  faith  and  hope  within  Pasian- 
certain  limits  of  class  and  locality.  But  their  influence,  what- 
ever the  halo  of  glory  with  which  it  is  encircled  in  our  minds, 
was  confined  to  a single  spot  and  a small  society.  The 
waves  of  opinion  and  sentiment  flowed  on,  free  and  uncon- 
trolled, and  the  ideas  of  Rome,  conqueror  and  mistress  though 
she  was,  were  left  stranded  on  the  shore.  We  have  seen  the 
wide  diffusion  of  the  Sibylline  prophecies,  pointing  towards 


eso 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


a new  advent  or  development,  in  the  time  of  Augustus,  and 
that  emperor’s  efforts  to  compel  the  anticipations  of  mankind 
to  centre  and  terminate  in  himself.  We  have  remarked  the 
ready  acquiescence  of  the  Roman  world  in  the  hope  that  each 
succeeding  emperor  would  he  in  truth  its  expected  Preserver, 
and  how  willingly  it  ascribed  divinity  to  the  lords  of  the 
human  race.  The  fair  promise  of  Caius  and  N ero  was  hailed 
with  insensate  acclamations;  hut  Vespasian  issuing  from 
Judea  and  Egypt,  seemed  more  literally  to  fulfil  the  presage 
derived  from  the  Jewish  oracles.  The  claim  to  miraculous 
powers,  thrust  on  him  even  against  his  will,  was  doubtless 
the  effect  of  a predetermination  among  his  flatterers  in  the 
East  to  present  nim  as  the  true  Messiah,  possibly  with  a de- 
sire of  eclipsing  the  claims  of  the  Messiah  of  the  Gospel.1 * 
The  leaders  of  the  popular  movements  among  rude  nations 
have  at  all  times  pretended  to  supernatural  powers.  Such 
were  the  claims  of  Athenio  in  Sicily,  of  Sertorius  in  Spain ; 
yet  we  must  be  struck  by  the  urgency  with  which  such 
claims  were  advanced  at  this  period  by  the  chiefs  of  every 
people  with  whom  the  Romans  contended,  by  the  Jews,  the 
Britons,  the  Gauls  and  the  Germans.3  The  earnestness  on 

1 Champagny,  Rome  et  la  Judee , 499. : “ Yespasien  semble  avoir  tite 

arrange  par  les  historiens  pour  etre  une  contrefajon  du  Christ.  Jdsus,  reali- 
sant  la  prophetie  de  Hichee,  est  sorti  de  Bethleem  pour  devenir  le  roi  pacifique 
de  toutes  les  nations : Yespasien,  h qui  on  applique  cette  meme  prophetie,  sort 
de  Judee  pour  fetre  le  dominateur  pacifique  d’un  empire  qui  s’appelait  le  monde. 
Jesus  fait  des  miracles ; Yespasien  en  fera  if  son  tour.  Jusque-lil,  les  pretend- 
us  miracles  du  paganisme  se  faisaient  le  plus  souvent  sous  la  main  de  l’homme ; 
l’homme  en  etait  le  temoin,  l’interprhte,  le  proneur,  le  preparateur  cache  plutot 
que  1’ agent  direct  et  libre ; ici  il  n’en  sei-a  plus  ainsi : Jesus  guerissait  les  in- 
firmes,  Yespasien  se  fera  amener  des  infirmes.  Le  plus  souvent,  dans  le  pa- 
ganisme, les  guerissons  pretendues  merveilleuses  s’operaient  dans  un  songc  qui 
indiquait  le  remtde  au  malade ; aujourd’hui,  c’est  a un  medecin  sumaturel  que 
Ic  songe  renverra  le  malade.  Jesus  guerissait  un  aveugle  avec  sa  salive,  Ves- 
pasien  pretendra  guerir  un  aveugle  avec  sa  salive.  Jesus  a gueri  un  paraly- 
tique,  Yespasien  guerira  un  paralytique.  La  contrefaijon  est  evidente.”  I be- 
lieve the  remark  to  be  a just  one,  and,  if  so,  it  shows  how  deep  an  impression 
the  historical  pretensions  of  Christianity  had  already  made. 

a The  Druids  in  Britain  waged  a religious  war  against  the  Romans  ; Mari- 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


281 


spiritual  questions  which  marked  the  epoch  before  us,  was 
caused  perhaps,  in  no  slight  degree,  by  the  wide  dispersion 
of  the  Jews,  who  displayed,  amidst  a world  of  fellow-subjects 
and  exiles,  a visible  token  of  the  sustaining  power  of  faith  or 
fanaticism.  1ST  or  can  we  doubt  that  the  awakening  of  reason 
and  conscience  then  apparent  even  in  pagan  societies,  was 
also  due,  as  in  the  corresponding  circumstances  of  our  own 
times,  to  the  diffusion  of  peace,  comfort  and  security,  and  to 
the  interchange  of  sentiment  which  followed  upon  unre- 
stricted commerce.  Even  the  teachers  of  philosophy  and 
religion  were  swayed  by  the  same  predominating  influence. 
The  first  ages  of  Christianity  were  signalized  by  the  rapid 
succession  of  prophets  or  wonder-workers,  who  assumed  a 
sanction  for  their  opinions  in  their  immediate  connexion,  or 
actual  identification,  with  the  Deity.  The  Roman  sword 
mishit  still  retain  the  keenness  of  its  edge  in  the  contests  of 
the  battle-field ; but  the  narrow  and  simple  faith  of  the  Fo- 
rum and  the  Capitol  was  powerless  against  the  wit  and  logic, 
the  eloquence  and  fanaticism,  of  the  schools  and  synagogues. 

These  claims  to  divine  powers  and  a divine  mission  be- 
came more  frequent  among  the  Jews  after  the  fall  of  their 
holv  city.  Their  morbid  superstition  received  a 

J . 1 . Overthrow  of 

strong  impulse  from  the  overthrow  of  their  tern-  the  Jewish,  and 

. , . n . . . succession  of 

pie,  the  cessation  of  tneir  most  solemn  rites,  and  the  Christian 

the  mutilation  of  their  ceremonial  system.  Juda-  Ki,tUs“Uu“- 
ism  was  distinguished  from  the  religions  of  Greece  and  Rome 
by  its  strictly  local  character.  The  service  of  Jupiter  and 
Juno,  Apollo  and  Hercules,  had  been  carried  by  the  Pagan 
to  the  ends  of  the  world,  and  the  cult  of  the  Acropolis  or  the 
Capitol  was  propagated  with  little  variation  from  its  metro- 
politan type  throughout  the  colonies  of  Rome  and  Athens. 
But  the  ritual  observances  of  Jewish  worship  were  confined 
to  one  sacred  spot:  the  priesthood,  the  sacrifices,  the  holy 
days,  the  outward  tokens  of  the  ancient  covenant,  pertained 

cus  the  Gaul  affected  divine  powers ; the  priestesses  of  the  Germans,  Aurinia, 
Ganna,  and  Valeda,  assumed  the  direction  of  the  people  as  instinct  with  a 
spiritual  authority. 


282 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMAN  A 


to  the  ceremonial  of  the  Temple  and  to  no  other.  The  cele- 
bration of  the  Passover  ceased  with  the  destruction  of  the 
place  in  which  the  descendant  of  Aaron  offered  a propitiation 
once  a year  for  the  sins  of  the  Jewish  people.  When  the 
Temple  was  overthrown  and  the  Temple-service  abolished, 
the  Mosaic  law  was  reduced  to  a bare  lifeless  record,  and  the 
historic  cult  of  Jehovah  collapsed.  The  traditions  of  the 
Levitical  system,  which  had  survived  so  many  revolutions, 
captivities  and  oppressions,  were  retained  henceforth  in  the 
recollection  of  private  families  only,  in  domestic  observances, 
in  fragmentary  usages ; they  were  no  longer  embodied  in  a 
public  ritual,  no  longer  guaranteed  by  a recognized  succes- 
sion of  interpreters,  nor  maintained  as  the  title-deeds  of  an 
authorized  ministry.  The  continuity  of  the  Jewish  religion 
was  sundered ; the  distinction  of  tribes  and  families  was  lost ; 
the  children  of  Eleazar  and  the  descendants  of  Levi  were 
mingled  with  the  common  herd;  the  genealogies  so  long 
preserved  were  lost  in  the  common  ruin,  and  the  threads  of 
descent  could  never  be  recovered.  But,  meanwhile,  a recent 
offset  from  Judaism,  the  religion  of  Jesus  the  Messiah,  was 
at  hand  to  seize  the  vacant  inheritance  of  divine  protection, 
and  to  offer  a new  system,  flourishing  in  the  vigour  of  youth 
and  hope,  to  the  despairing  votaries  of  the  old.  By  many  of 
the  Jewish  people  in  all  parts  of  the  world,  this  compensa- 
tion was  gratefully  accepted  as  an  unexpected  deliverance ; 
but  the  mass  still  turned  from  it  with  bitterer  feelings  than 
ever,  and  nursed  their  despair  with  more  fanatical  hatred 
both  of  the  Romans  and  the  Christians. 

Whatever  allowance  we  make  for  the  exaggerations  of 
Josephus,  it  would  seem  that  the  massacres  of  the  Jewish 
Establishment  waL  an^  the  expatriation  of  its  myriads  of  cap- 
scboo1sJatTR  tives,  had  left  Palestine  in  a state  of  desolation 
benas.  from  which  she  was  destined  never  thoroughly 

to  recover.  The  artificial  culture  of  her  arid  slopes,  once  in- 
terrupted, required  a strong  national  spirit,  nourished  with 
youthful  hopes  and  aspirations,  to  retrieve  it.  The  province 
of  Judea  fell  under  the  emperor’s  administration,  and  its  tolls 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


283 


and  tributes  accrued  to  bis  private  exchequer.  Vespasian, 
frugal  and  provident  by  temper,  felt  an  interest  in  the  repar- 
tition of  the  vacant  soil  among  a new  tenantry ; and  under 
his  superintendence  measures  were  taken  for  repeopling 
the  territory  with  fresh  colonists.  But  Domitian  was  too 
reckless  of  the  future,  even  in  respect  of  his  own  private  in- 
terests, to  execute  the  plans  bequeathed  to  him,  and  during 
his  government  the  patrimony  of  the  Jewish  people  was  left, 
we  may  believe,  for  the  most  part  in  the  state  to  which  the 
war  had  reduced  it.  On  the  hills  of  Zion  and  Moriah,  indeed, 
and  on  other  sites  of  their  now  ruined  cities,  the  trembling 
fugitives  gradually  reassembled,  and  crouched  among  the 
ruins  of  their  fallen  palaces ; but  the  habitations  they  here 
slowly  raised  more  resembled  the  squalid  villages  of  the 
Arabs  amid  the  remains  of  Petra  and  Palmyra,  than  the  seats 
of  an  established  community.  It  was  at  Tiberias,  on  the 
banks  of  the  celebrated  lake  which  bore  its  name,  that  the 
remnant  of  the  Jewish  polity  again  took  root  for  a season, 
under  the  direction  of  a new  school  of  religious  teaching. 
The  priests  of  the  Temple,  and  the  Sanhedrim  which  had  met 
in  its  holy  courts,  were  here  superseded  by  the  doctors  of  the 
law,  the  rabbis,  who  interpreted  the  national  Scriptures  by 
the  traditions  of  which  they  assumed  to  be  the  genuine  de- 
positaries. Tear  by  year  this  audacious  substitution  of  the 
gloss  for  the  letter  acquired  form  and  consistency.  The  sim- 
ple text  of  the  Law,  for  which  the  patriots  of  old 

, 1 The  Law,  the 

had  combated,  was  overlaid  by  the  comment-  Mischna,  and 

ary  of  the  Mischna,  and  at  a still  later  period, 
the  text  of  the  Mischna  itself  was  in  like  manner  overlaid  by 
the  commentary  of  the  Gemara.  The  degrees  of  estimation 
in  which  these  successive  volumes  came  to  be  held  among  the 
degenerate  descendants  of  Abraham  and  Moses  were  marked 
by  the  popular  comparison  which  likened  the  Bible  to  water, 
the  Mischna  to  wine,  the  Gemara  to  hypocras  ; or,  again,  the 
first  to  salt,  the  second  to  pepper,  and  the  third  to  frankin- 
cense. He  who  studies  the  Scripture,  it  was  said,  does  an 
.ndifferent  action;  he  who  devotes  himself  to  the  Mischna 


>84 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


does  a good  action  ; but  he  who  learns  the  Gemara  deserves 
the  most  glorious  of  rewards.1 

The  sound  in  heart  among  the  Jews  were  no  doubt  now 
rapidly  absorbed  into  the  gathering  mass  of  Christian  belief. 

Dispersion  of  ^ie  PerPetuati°n  °f  the  national  ideas  was  aban- 
tho  Jews  in  the  doned  to  the  dregs  and  offscourings  of  the  peo- 
pie,  by  whom  they  were  thus  travestied  and 
degraded.  The  race  which  could  feed  to  satiety  on  the  gross 
fancies  of  the  Talmud,  after  banqueting  so  long  on  the  sub- 
lime inspiration  of  the  Old  Testament,  deserved  the  long 
eclipse  of  reason  and  imagination  which  was  about  to  envel- 
ope it.  Nevertheless,  the  political  spirit  of  the  Jews  still  re- 
tained its  fervid  vitality,  and  continued  to  animate  them  to 
repeated  outbreaks  of  insensate  violence  against  the  power 
with  which  it  was  hopeless  to  cope.  Dispossessed  of  their 
ancestral  seats,  they  accepted  the  doom  of  national  disper- 
sion, and  migrated  by  preference  to  the  regions  where  former 


Their  numbers 
in  Mesopota- 
mia ; their  tur- 
bulence in 
Egypt,  C}rprus, 
and  Cyrene. 

monarch. 


swarms  of  their  own  race  had  already  settled,  both  within 
and  beyond  the  limits  of  the  empire.  Multitudes 
thus  transplanted  themselves  to  Egypt  and 
Cyprus,  nor  fewer  perhaps  to  Mesopotamia, 
where  they  fell  under  the  sway  of  the  Parthian 
In  Egypt,  the  chronic  turbulence  of  the  Jewish 
residents  was  increased  by  this  influx  from  the  old  country, 
and  attempts  were  made  to  engage  the  whole  Jewish  popula- 
tion of  the  African  coast  in  a league  against  the  Romans. 
Could  they  indeed  be  brought  to  act  in  concert,  their  numbers 
might  render  them  truly  formidable.  Even  before  the  sud- 
den immigration  which  followed  on  the  fall  of  Jerusalem, 
this  flourishing  community  had  often  turned  the  scale  in  the 
contests  of  Alexandria  and  Cyrene. 

The  promoters  of  the  movements  that  ensued  pretended,  as 
usual,  to  a divine  mission.  In  Alexandria  a remnant  of  the 
Severe  meas-  Zealots,  who  had  escaped  from  the  slaughter  of 
tFe  Jewa'in  their  countrymen,  inflamed  the  minds  of  their 
Egypt.  compatriots  with  hopes  of  a special  inteference, 


1 See  the  authorities  in  Cliampagny,  Rome  et  Judee,  p.  540.  Comp.  Sal- 
vador. ii.  480. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


283 


and  raised  their  fanaticism  to  the  highest  pitch.  In 
vain  did  the  more  sober  of  the  Jewish  population  protest 
against  this  superstitious  frenzy ; the  apprehensions  of  the 
government  were  thoroughly  aroused,  and  Lupus,  the  prefect 
of  the  province,  required  all  the  residents  of  Jewish  origin  to 
attest  their  disavowal  of  these  seditious  aspirations  by  a 
declaration  of  submission  to  Caesar  as  their  master.  Such  a 
vow  of  allegiance  sufficed  for  their  protection ; but  great 
numbers,  impelled  by  a furious  fanaticism,  sternly  refused  to 
utter  the  words,  and  persisted  in  their  refusal  in  the  face  of 
death  and  tortures.  The  courage  of  women,  and  even  of 
children,  in  this  extremity,  was  worthy  of  the  heroic  age  of 
the  nation.1  But  armed  resistance  was  either  not  attempted, 
or  easily  put  down.  The  Jewish  temple  erected 

J 1 . Closing  of  the 

by  the  priest  Onias  at  Heliopolis,  with  the  sanction  Jewish  temple 

* , r . 1 ’ . „ at  Heliopolis. 

ot  the  1 tolemies,  during  the  persecution  ox 
Antiochus  Epiphanes,  the  only  temple  throughout  the  world 
which  wasmodelled  afterthe  pattern  of  thenational  sanctuary, 
and  was  intended  to  serve  as  a solitary  substitute  for  it, 
was  now  turned,  like  the  temple  at  Jerusalem,  into  a place 
of  defence,  and  for  a moment  the  senseless  multitude  offered 
defiance  to  their  enemies.  But  the  gates  were  opened  at  the 
first  summons,  and  the  government,  with  singular  forbearance, 
was  content  with  expelling  the  J ews  from  the  spot,  and  for- 
bidding them  to  meet  there  for  worship.2  Even  the  custom- 
ary assembling  in  the  synagogues  was  not  apparently  inter- 
dicted; the  inquisition  that  followed  was  simply  political, 
and  the  religion  of  the  rebel  race  was  not  proscribed.  So 
again  at  Cyrene,  where  a more  violent  outbreak  occurred, 
the  Romans  still  spared  the  Jewish  worship.  They  per- 
ceived, with  unusual  sagacity,  that  it  was  easier  to  control 
the  people  if  allowed  to  foster  their  mutual  sectarian  jealous- 
ies, than  if  united  in  heart  and  mind  under  a common  perse- 

1 Joseph,  Bell.  Jud.  vii.  10.  1. : Tzacrlg  yap  erf  avrovc  fiaoavov  nai  Kiutjs 
tov  cupaTuv  EmvcnjOetcric,  eft  ev  tovto  fiSvov , ottuq  avrani  K aioapa  6ean6rrjv 
i/ioXoyr/ouaiv,  ovSelt - eveduaev,  oils’  epeTiX^aev  elireiv. 

2 Joseph.  Antig.  xx.  10.  3.  Bell  Jud.  vii.  10.  3. 


286 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


sedition  of  cution.  At  Cyrene  a leadei’  named  Jonathan, 

Cyreneacirc.  led  his  countrymen  into  the  desert,  with  the 

a.  d.  65.  promise  of  Divine  protection,  hat  the  movement 

speedily  ended  in  mutual  charges  and  recriminations.  Some 
of  the  chiefs  of  the  sedition  were  sent  to  Rome  by  the  gov- 
ernor Catullus,  to  answer  for  their  turbulence,  and  seem  to 
have  there  laid  accusations  against  their  countryman  Jose- 
phus, which  it  required  all  his  credit  with  Vespasian  and 
Titus  to  baffle.1  Rut  at  Rome  the  Jews  were  perhaps  spe- 
cially protected  by  the  contempt  into  which  they  had  fallen. 
They  no  longer  occupied  the  high  places  of  the  city,  courted 
by  men  and  women  of  noble  birth,  cherished  by  one  emperor, 
and  feared  by  another.  They  slunk  from  the  public  sight  in 
the  most  miserable  quarters,  and  scraped  together  a liveli- 
hood by  the  pettiest  traffic.  Their  position  in  society  is 
marked  by  the  passing  sneers  of  Martial  and  Juvenal.2 3 
Their  unchangeable  spirit  of  isolation,  and  the  instinct  with 
which  they  maintained  their  established  customs,  are  shown 
even  in  the  places  they  chose  for  sepulture,  the  lonely  cat- 
acombs, which  recalled  to  their  imaginations  the  caves  in 
which  their  fathers  were  buried.' 

Among  the  most  vicious  features  of  the  national  charac- 
ter, and  that  which  contributed  above  any  other  to  unnerve 
the  Jews  in  contest  with  their  enemies,  was  their  constant 

1 Joseph.  Bell.  Jud.  vii.  11.  Jonathan  was  put  to  death  by  Vespasian. 
This  is  our  nearest  approximation  to  the  date. 

2 Juvenal,  iii.  14,  foil. ; vi.  542,  foil. ; xiv.  96,  foil.  Martial,  iv.  4.,  vii.  32., 
xi.  94.  We  have  already  noticed  the  ignorant  contempt  with  which  Tacitus 
had  learnt  to  regard  them. 

3 According  to  the  most  accredited  theory  at  the  present  day,  the  catacombs 
at  Rome  were  originally  excavated  or  adopted  by  the  Jews  for  their  place  of 
sepulture.  Their  feelings  revolted  against  the  Roman  mode  of  burning  the 
dead,  and  their  old  traditions  would  naturally  suggest  to  them  the  disposal  of 
their  mortal  remains  in  caves  hewn  in  the  rock.  Jerusalem  itself  had  been 
mined  by  passages  and  caverns,  but  these  were  used  for  reservoirs  or  maga- 
zines ; it  does  not  appear,  I think,  that  they  were  appropriated  to  the  purpose 
of  sepulture.  The  Christians  at  Rome  inherited  the  burying  places  of  their 
predecessors  in  the  faith  of  Palestine. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


23? 


disposition  to  inflame  their  rulers  against  sects  and  parties 
among  themselves,  with  which  they  had  domestic  differences. 
Their  political  enthusiasts,  the  Zealots  and  Sicarii,  could 
postpone  every  desperate  scheme  of  national  resuscitation,  to 
get  vengeance  on  the  Moderates,  or  Herodians,  of  whom  J ose- 
phus,  as  we  have  seen,  was  a conspicuous  leader.  inquiSition 
In  the  same  manner,  their  most  devout  religion-  omh^chrfs^3 
ists  were  ready  at  any  moment  to  denounce  to  tian3- 
prefects  and  governors  the  pious  followers  of  the  Christ 
Jesus,  and  traduce  them  as  intriguers  against  the  public 
peace,  and  abandoned  to  the  grossest  impurities.  The  Ro- 
mans, who  had  instituted  strict  inquiries  respecting  the  ex- 
pectations of  a Deliverer  so  fondly  cherished  among  the 
Jewish  communities,  and  had  specially  prosecuted  all  who 
pretended  to  descent  from  David,  were  induced  by  these 
manoeuvres  to  examine  into  the  tenets  of  the  Christians,  so 
far  as  related  to  the  person  of  Christ,  the  acknowledged 
founder  of  their  sect ; hut  failing  to  discover  in  him  any  po- 
litical character,  they  were  generally  satisfied  with  requiring 
of  his  followers  the  same  hare  acknowledgment  of  the  empe- 
ror’s supremacy  as  of  their  Jewish  compatriots.  The  formula 
which  was  proposed  to  the  Jews,  was  probably  identical 
with  that  set  before  the  Christians.  They  were  required, 
no  doubt,  to  call  Caesar  master.  The  immoralities  alleged 
against  them  were  disbelieved,  or  contemptuously  disregard- 
ed. The  traditions  of  the  Church,  which  point 

AHpo-p.fi  decrees 

to  a general  persecution  of  the  believers  in  the  of  Nero  and 
. ° . Domitian. 

1 1 avian  period,  cannot  be  lightly  set  aside,  and 
to  this  extent  they  may  safely  be  credited,  though  the  asser- 
tion of  a special  decree  issued  by  1ST ero,  and  enforced  by  hi? 
successors  against  them,  seems  too  improbable  to  be  admit- 
ted without  stronger  evidence.  The  historical  traces  of  such 
a persecution  even  in  Rome  are  faint  and  indecisive;  yet, 
according  to  all  analogy,  it  was  only  in  Rome,  or  among 
Roman  citizens  in  the  provinces,  that  the  central  government 
would  interfere  to  prohibit  religious  usages,  however  strange 
and  technically  illicit.  ISTor  would  a special  law  be  required 


288 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


for  the  suppression  of  a dangerous  or  immoral  usage  in  the 
provinces.  There  the  praetor’s  edict  would  arm  the  magis- 
trate with  power  against  disturbers  of  peace  and  security ; 
the  general  authority  that  magistrate  brought  from  Rome 
entitled  him  to  protect  by  his  own  decree  the  public  tran- 
quillity or  decorum ; and  even  if  a certain  worship  was  pro- 
scribed as  illicit  in  the  city,  it  might  still  rest  practically  in 
his  discretion  to  permit  or  to  prohibit  it  in  his  own  province.1 

There  remains,  amidst  the  wreck  of  ancient  documents, 
one  distinct  and  most  valuable  record  of  the  action  of  the 
government  in  this  particular  at  a distance  from 
the  capital.  Bithynia,  the  province  referred  to, 
and  the  adjacent  parts  of  Asia,  were  at  the  time 
more  leavened  with  Christian  opinions  than  other 
districts  of  the  empire.  For  in  these  regions  the  Jews,  who 
had  followed  perhaps  the  Roman  spoilers  and  taxgatherers, 
and  taken  the  land  in  mortgage  for  their  loans,  were  espe- 
cially numerous,  and  in  these  the  preaching  of  the  Apostles 
had  been  eminently  successful ; here  also  the  old  Pagan 
superstitions  had  been  long  undermined,  and  the  soil  was 
favourable  for  the  growth  of  a new  and  vigorous  shoot  of 


Pliny’s  letter 
to  Trajan  re- 
specting tho 
Christians  in 
Bithynia. 


spiritual  life.  The  social  and  political  ferment  of  the  times 
manifested  itself  here  above  most  places  by  yearnings  for 
spiritual  illumination.  It  was  appointed,  moreover,  that  the 
governor  of  Bithynia  in  the  early  years  of  Trajan  should  be 
neither  one  of  the  ordinary  class  of  Roman  prefects,  indiffer- 
ent alike  to  all  religious  manifestations,  and  indisposed  to 
trouble  himself  with  inquiries  about  them;  nor,  on  the  other 
hand,  a sanguinary  bigot,  such  as  often  drew  the  sword  at 
once  in  fear  or  hatred,  and  looked  to  no  other  means  of  re- 
pressing odious  opinions.  The  younger  Pliny,  of  whom  we 
have  already  heard  so  favourably,  was  vigilant  and  labori- 
ous, and  his  personal  attachment  to  his  master  rendered  him 


1 Even  the  Christian  apologists,  who  assert  the  promulgation  of  a law 
against  their  sect  by  Nero,  speak  of  the  persecutions  as  occasional  and  local 
Such  is  the  complaint  of  Quadratus  under  Hadrian : brl  dr/  tiveq  irovrjpol  avdpet 
rove  >)uETepov(  evox^iv  eTceipuvTO.  Euseb.  Hist.  Ecclcs.  iv  3 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


289 


more  than  commonly  anxious  to  put  down  any  movements 
in  his  district  which  might  seem  prejudicial  to  the  interests 
of  the  government.  But  he  was  at  the  same  time  kindly  in 
disposition,  a lover  of  justice,  desirous  of  acting  fairly  and 
considerately.  He  made  it  a point  of  conscience  to  govern 
his  province  as  a philosopher,  not  as  a mere  soldier.1 *  He 
was  resolved  to  suppress  all  political  enemies;  but  he  was 
resolved  to  do  so  with  temper  and  moderation.  Hence  his 
correspondence  with  Trajan,  one  of  our  most  curious  monu- 
ments of  antiquity,  contains  the  formal  justification  of  his 
acts  which  he  desired  to  leave  on  record.  From  these  letters 
we  learn  all  that  can  really  be  known  of  the  methods  of  the 
Roman  government  in  regard  to  the  Christians.3 

Thus  we  find  Pliny  speaking  of  the  Christians,  at  the 
commencement  of  the  second  century,  as  a well-known  class, 
whose  name  requires  no  explanation,  and  of  the 

1 f,  . ’ Pliny’s  pro- 

law  reo-ardino-  them  as  sufficiently  understood,  ceedtngs 

a . , , - „ , . against  the 

When  certain  persons  were  brought  before  him,  Christians, 
charged  with  the  crime  of  being  Christians , he 
simply  demanded  whether  they  were  really  such,  and  on 
their  acknowledging  the  designation,  and  persisting  a second 
and  third  time  in  the  confession,  he  ordered  them  to  be 
capitally  punished.3  If,  however,  they  were  Roman  citizens, 

1 See  the  advice  he  gives  to  a friend  who  is  about  to  undertake  the  gov- 
ernment of  Asia.  3p.  viii.  24. 

1 The  well-known  letter  of  Pliny  and  the  answer  of  Trajan  are  numbered  x. 
96,  97.  in  Gierig’s  edition,  to  which  I have  referred  throughout  (vulg.  9*7,  98.). 
Their  date  is  fixed  by  Clinton  to  a.  d.  104,  a.  u.  857,  the  seventh  year  of  Tra- 
jan’s reign ; but  see  Greswell,  Suppl.  Dissert,  p.  200,  foil.,  where  the  chronol- 
ogy of  Pliny’s  letters  is  arranged,  and  his  proconsulship  assigned  to  111-113  ; 
the  letter  in  question  to  112.  Mr.  Greswell  suggests  the  probability  that  Pliny, 
of  whom  we  have  no  further  mention,  joined  Trajan  in  the  East,  and  perished 
in  the  earthquake  at  Antioch  in  115.  See  below. 

3 Plin.  Epist.  x.  96.  3. : “ perseverantes  duci  jussi.”  He  thinks  it  necessary 
to  excuse  this  severity  by  the  remark  that,  whatever  might  be  the  complexion 
of  their  opinions,  the  obstinacy  of  the  persons  who  thus  maintained  them  in 
defiance  of  the  government,  was  in  itself  deserving  of  punishment.  Roman 
titizens  were  sent  to  be  dealt  with  in  Rome. 

128 


VOL  VII- 


290 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


he  sent  them  to  Rome  for  trial.  He  consults  the  emperor 
whether  this  is  the  proper  mode  of  proceeding,  which,  as  he 
admits,  seems  rather  to  increase  the  number  of  the  denounced, 
and  to  fan  the  flame  of  perverse  opposition  to  the  law.1 2  On 
the  other  hand,  the  measures  he  has  taken  of  his  own  accord 
for  checking  the  informers,  and  forbidding  inquiry  to  be  made 
into  the  profession  of  the  obnoxious  tenets,  have  been  speedily 
attended  with  good  effects : the  temples  have  become  more  fre- 
quented, and  there  is  a readier  sale  for  beasts  for  sacrifice. 
Hence  it  appears  that  the  mere  profession  of  the  name  of  Chris- 
tian had  been  once  ruled  to  be  capital  in  this  province ; but  the 
actual  execution  of  the  law  lay  in  the  governor’s  discretion,  and 
he,  if  considerate  and  conscientious,  or  if  the  affair  seemed  to 
assume  unusual  importance,  would  refer  the  decision  to  the 
emperor  himself.3  The  famous  persecution  of  the  Christians 
in  Bithynia  was,  I believe,  a temporary  measure  of  precaution 
against  disturbances  apprehended  by  the  local  government 
from  the  spread  of  strange  and  suspected  usages  rather  than 
doctrines,  which  seemed  connected  more  or  less  closely  with 
the  disaffection  of  the  Jews.  The  danger  uppermost  in 
Pliny’s  mind  was  that  which  might  spring  from  a political 
combination.3  The  Christians  and  the  Jews  were  subjected, 
as  we  t_a/e  seen,  to  a similar  inquisition,  wherever  their 

1 “ Hox  ipso  tractatu,  ut  fieri  solet,  difliindente  se  crimine,  plures  species 
inciderant,”  1.  c.  4 Persons  were  accused,  apparently  from  motives  of  private 
spite,  who  denied  at  once  that  they  were  or  ever  had  been  Christians,  and 
sacrificed  without  hesitation  before  the  images  of  the  gods  and  of  the  emperor. 

2 The  rescripts  of  the  emperors  addressed  to  the  governors  of  particular 
provinces  did  not  apply  elsewhere  unless  specially  provided.  See  Trajan  to 
Pliny,  Epist.  x.  75. : “ qusestio  quae  pertinet  ad  eos  qui  liberi  nati,  expositi, 
deinde  sublati  ....  soepe  tractata  est ; nec  quidquam  invenitur  in  commenta- 
riis  eorum  principum  qui  ante  me  fuerunt,  quod  ad  omnes  provincias  sit  consti- 
tution. Epistolas  sane  sunt  Domitiani  ad  Avidium  ....  qu <sfortasse  debent 
observari : sed  inter  eas  provincias  de  quibus  rescripsit  non  est  Bithynia.” 
Comp.  Epist.  x.  74 . on  the  same  subject : “ recitabatur  edictum  quod  dicebatur 
D.  Augusti  ad  Annium,  et  D.  Yespasiani  ad  Lacedasmonios,  et  D.  Titi  aJ 
eosdem,  deinde  ad  Achseos,  etc.” 

s Plin.  Epist.  x.  96.  7. : “ secundum  mandata  tua  hetserias  esse  vetueram.” 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


291 


numbers  rendered  them  objects  of  jealousy.  But  if  Jews  01 
Christians  could  acquiesce  in  the  form  of  homage  to  the  em- 
peror, neither  one  nor  the  other  could  offer  the  most  trifling 
service  to  the  idols  of  paganism.1  With  respect  to  both 
classes  of  recusants  the  government  employed  the  harshest 
means  to  enforce  submission,  its  barbarity  increasing  with 
the  defiance  it  encountered.  But  here  the  parallel  ends. 
All  that  can  be  said  for  the  Jews  even  by  their  own  co- 
religionists, in  this  cruel  trial,  is  that  they  suffered  with 
dauntless  constancy,  and  bore  a noble  testimony  to  their 
faith.  But  upon  the  Christians,  now  at  the  threshold  of  their 
long  career  of  manifold  temptations,  a far  higher  eulogium 
has  been  passed.  Their  witness  is  a political  enemy,  their 
judge  is  a pagan  philosopher.  Pliny  allows  that  His  testimony 
he  can  discover  no  crime,  not  even  the  crime  of  to  virtues, 
political  disaffection,  among  them:  their  meetings,  though 
conducted  privately  and  before  daylight,  were  completely 
innocent,  and  their  bloodless  ceremonial  confined  to  singing- 
hymns  to  the  Founder  of  their  faith,  as  a Divine  Being,  and 
to  binding  themselves  by  a vow,  ratified  by  a simple  meal  in 
common,  not  to  rob,  nor  to  cheat,  nor  to  commit  adultery.2 
So  ancient  and  genuine  a testimony  to  the  virtue  of  the  first 
believers,  and  to  the  peculiar  graces  of  their  life  and  conver- 
sation, is  justly  regarded  as  one  of  the  proudest  monuments 

1 Thus  Pliny  requires  the  Christians  to  sacrifice  to  the  gods  and  the  genius 
of  the  emperor : “ cum  praeeunte  me  Deos  appellarent,  et  imagini  tuae,  quam 
propter  hoc  jusseram  cum  simulacris  numinum  adferri,  thure  ac  vino  suppliea- 
rent.”  Plin.  L c.  5. 

2 Plin.  1.  c.  I7. : “ adfinnabant  autem  hanc  fuisse  summam  vel  culpse  suss, 
vel  erroris,  quod  essent  soliti  stato  die  ante  lucem  convenire  carmenque  Christo, 
quasi  Deo,  dicere  secum  invicem,  seque  Sacramento  non  in  scelus  aliquod  ob- 
stringere,  sed  ne  furta,  ne  latroeinia,  ne  adulteria  committerent,  ne  fidem  falle- 
rent,  ne  depositum  abnegarent,  etc.”  All  those  merits,  through  freely  ac- 
knowledged, weighed  as  nothing  with  so  zealous  a courtier,  against  the  appa- 
rent disregard,  not  of  the  gods  so  much  as  of  the  emperor.  Pliny  flattered 
himself,  that  his  measures  against  these  innocent  meetings  were  effectual: 
**  quod  ipsum  facere  desiisse  post  edictum  meum.” 


292 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


of  ou  r faith.  The  letter  of  Pliny,  it  has  been  well  said,  is  the 
first  Apology  for  Christianity? 

Nevertheless,  this  favourable  testimony  availed  little  to 
protect  the  Christians  from  the  alarms  of  paganism.  Trajan 
The  popular  indeed,  when  solicited  to  determine  how  they 
oF^rpohti-  should  be  treated,  was  satisfied  with  recommend- 
eai  intrigues.  }ng  measures  in  a tone  of  almost  contempt- 
uous liberality.  He  directed  that  the  professors  of  the  pro- 
scribed opinions  should  not  be  sought  for,  and  that  no 
encouragement  should  be  given  to  the  informers,  who  were 
generally  Jews.3  Still,  however,  if  malefactors  so  bold  and 
perverse  should  be  brought  before  the  tribunals,  the  majesty 
of  the  law  required  that  they  should  be  firmly  and  sternly 
dealt  with.  The  courage  or  fanaticism  exhibited  by  these 
sectarians  inflamed  the  temper  of  then-  opponents,  while  even 
superstition  might  combine  to  exasperate  the  pagans  against 
the  new  enemies,  in  whose  zeal  and  purity  they  already  read 
the  doom  of  their  hollow  pretensions.  The  con- 

Superstitious  . . ,.  „ . .. 

terrors  of  the  hclent  anticipations  ot  a coming  Deliverer,  pro- 
fx  1 k’  claimed  from  the  Christian  pulpits,  seemed 

connected  with  the  repeated  threats  of  Nero’s  return  from 
the  Euphrates,  and  the  intrigues  of  the  Parthian  court ; while 
the  recurring  conflagrations  of  the  City  and  the  Capitol,  the 
fatal  eruption  of  Vesuvius,  and  renewed  activity  of  its  long 
dormant  fires,  pointed  in  the  minds,  not  of  the  vulgar  only, 
but  of  many  intelligent  thinkers,  to  a near  fulfilment  of  the 
Christian  prophecy,  that  the  world  itself  was  about  to  be 
consumed  in  a final  catastrophe.3 


1 Wallor,  Hist,  de  V Esclavage  dans  VAntiquile , iii.  13. 

3 Plin.  JEpisl.  x.  9T.  Trajan  carefully  limits  his  decision  to  the  particular 
case  and  locality  : “ neque  enim  in  universum  aliquid,  quod  quasi  certam  for- 
tnam  habeat,  constitui  potest.”  He  requires  that  all  denunciations  of  Chris- 
tians should  be  certified  with  the  name  of  the  informer : “ sine  auctore  vero 
propositi  libelli  nullo  crimine  locum  habere  debent.  Nam  et  pessimi  exempli 
nec  nostri  saeculi  est.”  It  is  very  remarkable  that  the  emperor  speaks  of  these 
people  as  if  he  had  never  heard  of  them  before.  It  is  difficult  to  suppose  that 
he  regarded  them  in  any  other  light  than  as  members  of  an  illegal  political  club. 

3 There  is  something  startling  in  the  modern  tone  of  sentiment  attested  by 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


293 


The  earliest  charge  against  the  believers  was  that  of  per- 
verse and  anti-social  usages,  and  a colour  was  given  to  then1 
proscription  by  the  want  of  legal  toleration  under  Martyrdom  of 
which  they  technically  laboured.  But  these  Jf^Annoc •£ 
frivolous  imputations  were  reinforced  by  the  A-  “• 115- 
fears  of  the  multitude,  who  referred  every  calamity  to  the 
anger  of  the  national  divinities  insulted  by  their  pretended 
impiety.  The  tradition  of  the  primitive  Church,  that  Igna- 
tius, the  bishop  of  Antioch,  was  examined  in  that  city  by 
Trajan  in  person,  and  condemned  by  him  to  a martyr’s  death, 
coincides  with  the  account  of  an  earthquake  by  which  the 
Eastern  capital  was  almost  destroyed  during  the  emperor’s 
residence  in  Syria.  The  date  of  the  martyrdom  itself  is  indeed 
a matter  of  doubt  and  controversy ; and  though  the  tradition 
can  hardly  be  rejected,  it  must  be  acknowledged  that  the 
historical  evidence  for  it  is  imperfect  and  conflicting.1  The 
authorities  unanimously  refer  the  event  to  a period  when  it 
can  be  shown  that  Trajan  was  still  in  the  West,  and  the 
account  of  the  interview  between  the  emperor  and  the  bishop, 
on  which  so  much  of  its  interest  depends,  rests,  it  must  be 
allowed,  on  suspicious  testimony.2  But  however  this  may 

Pliny  in  reference  to  the  great  eruption  : “ multi  ad  Deos  manus  tollere,  plures 
nusquam  jam  Deos  ullos,  cetemamque  illam  et  novissimam  nodem  mundo  inter- 
pretabantur.”_E)ra<.  vi.  20.  The  appointed  destruction  of  the  world  by  fire  was 
a tenet  of  the  fashionable  stoicism  of  the  day.  Lucan,  vii  814. : “ Communis 
mundo  superest  rogus.” 

1 Euseb.  Hist.  Evcl.  iii.  86.  S.  Hieron.  De  viris  illustr.  16.  The  first  of 
these  authorities  fixes  the  date  to  the  tenth  year  of  Trajan,  a.  r.  107.  The 
second  to  the  eleventh,  a.  d.  108.  The  Martyrium  S.  Ignatii  places  it  in  the 
consulship  of  Sura  and  Senecio,  i.  e.  a.  d.  107.  It  is  now  generally  agreed  that 
Trajan  did  not  go  to  the  East  earlier  than  114  (see  Francke,  Clinton,  and  Gres- 
well),  and  remained  there  till  the  time  of  his  death  in  117.  The  earthquake  at 
Antioch  occurred  Jan.  115  (see  below),  during  the  consulship  of  Messala  and 
Pedo,  and  the  martyrdom  must  be  assigned  to  December  of  the  same  year. 
Martyr,  c.  6. 

2 We  need  not  enter  into  the  question  about  the  genuineness  of  the  epistles 
ascribed  to  Ignatius.  The  authenticity  of  the  Martyrium , or  Acta  Martyrii , is 
shaken  by  the  apparent  error  in  the  date.  The  later  Christian  writers  seem  to 
have  followed  its  chronology  pretty  closely,  and  so  far  may  be  considered  to  at> 


204 


HISTORY  OH  THE  ROMANS 


be,  the  barbarity  of  the  government  in  its  proscription  of 
opinion,  and  the  meek  endurance  of  the  believers,  are  fully 
established  on  the  unquestioned  evidence  of  Pliny ; and  that 
the  fanaticism  of  both  people  and  rulers  should  be  inflamed 
against  them  by  the  occurrence  of  great  public  calamities  is 
only  too  congenial  to  the  common  course  of  human  affairs.1 

On  ordinary  occasions,  however,  as  appears  from  Pliny’s 
memorable  despatches,  the  government  showed  some  con- 
sideration for  the  unfortunate  sectaries,  and  made 

Development 

of  the  Christian  an  attempt  to  check  promiscuous  attacks  upon 
them.  Meanwhile  other  enemies,  more  bitter 
than  the  legitimate  guardians  of  the  state  and  the  state- 
religion,  were  prompt  in  frustrating  these  merciful  inclina- 
tions. As  the  Christians  were  themselves  at  first  sectarians 
innovating  on  the  national  creed  of  Judaism  till  they  were 
cast  forth  from  its  bosom,  so  there  soon  appeared  within  the 
pale  of  Christianity  a strong  disposition  to  discover  fresh 
modifications  of  Christian  doctrine,  and  provoke  expulsion 
from  the  new  community.  The  Church  sought  to  convince 
the  innovators  alternately  by  argument  and  authority ; and 
it  is  clear  from  her  earliest  traditions  that  she  leant  to  the 
second  of  these  means  at  least  as  readily  as  to  the  first.  Her 
The  Church,  discipline  was  drawn  closer  by  the  stricter 
Scripture” and  organization  to  which  she  was  now  subjected: 
Episcopacy.  tli e decision  of  questions  of  doctrine  was  brought 

test  its  antiquity.  We  are  at  a loss,  however,  to  account  for  the  bishop  being 
sent  to  suffer  martyrdom  at  Rome,  and  the  narrative  bears  on  its  face  a strong 
appearance  of  being  moulded  into  a counterpart  to  the  last  voyage  of  St.  Paul. 

1 The  testimony  of  Hegesippus,  the  primitive  historian  of  Christianity  (cited 
by  Eusebius,  Hist.  Eccl.  iii.  32.)  to  the  martyrdom  of  Symeon,  bishop  of  Jeru- 
salem, under  Trajan,  is  generally  admitted.  See  Milman,  Hist,  of  Clvristinnity , 
ii.  150.  It  seems  that  the  martyr  was  stated  to  be  the  second  bishop  of  Jeru- 
salem, James,  who  suffered  a.  d.  44,  having  been  the  first.  He  was  also  the 
son  of  Cleopas.  He  was  prosecuted,  according  to  the  account,  as  one  of  the 
royal  seed  of  David,  a subject  of  inquisition,  as  we  have  seen,  under  Domitian. 
The  martyrologists  insisted  upon  making  him  a blood-relation  and  also  a 
hearer  of  Christ,  and  asserted  that  he  was  a hundred  and  twenty  years  old  at 
the  time  of  his  death.  The  year  of  the  martyrdom  is  not  specified,  but  it  was 
in  the  prefecture  of  Atticus.  It  is  not  said  that  the  emperor  took  cognizance 
of  the  case. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE, 


295 


to  a more  definite  point  by  the  formal  ratification  of  a Canon 
of  Scripture,  and  the  interpretation  of  Holy  Writ  was  re- 
ferred to  a tradition,  the  keys  of  which  were  lodged  with  her 
rulers,  the  bishops.  The  union  of  the  true  believers  was 
maintained  by  the  test  of  sacramental  forms ; and  the  Church 
assumed  the  proportions  of  a visible  system,  manifest  to  the 
world  without,  as  well  as  known  to  its  own  members.  The 
power  ol  excommunication  from  this  body,  assigned  to  the 
bishops,  was  easily  suffered  to  take  the  place  of  reasoning 
with  people,  against  whose  self-will  and  vanity  reasoning 
would  have  little  availed.  The  dying  exhortations  of  Igna- 
tius, purporting  to  be  addressed  to  the  various  churches 
during  his  pilgrimage  from  the  imperial  tribunal  to  the 
amphitheatre,  derive  their  force  and  interest  from  them  re- 
iterated admonitions  to  obey  the  bishop,  and  eschew  doctrinal 
error  by  holding  fast  the  traditions  preserved  by  the  Episco- 
pate. It  is  clear  that  the  almost  open  announcement  of  this 
social  organization,  this  spiritual  empire  in  the  centre  of  the 
temporal,  must  have  roused  unbounded  jealousy  in  a govern- 
ment which  could  hardly  tolerate  a committee  to  collect 
subscriptions  for  building  an  aqueduct.  The  heretics  saw 
their  advantage,  and  retorted  on  the  orthodox  by  denouncing 
them  to  the  government,  and  still  more  fatally  by  exciting 
the  passions  of  the  populace  against  them ; 1 for  when  the 
populace  cried  aloud  in  the  theatres  for  any  object  of  their 
capricious  desires,  the  Roman  governor  was  bound,  by  the 
prescriptions  of  ancient  usage,  to  give  it  them.  Hence  the 
sanguinary  character  of  the  Roman  policy  towards  the  Chris- 
tians even  at  this  early  stage,  and  the  mixture  with  it  of 
popular  ferocity,  so  soon  outrunning  the  tardier  and  more 

1 Pliny’s  account  of  the  treatment  of  Christians  is  confirmed  by  Eusebius, 
H 1st.  Ecdes.  iii.  33.,  with  the  addition  that  the  informations  against  them  were 
often  laid  by  the  heretics.  For  the  history  of  these  persecutions  he  refers,  be- 
sides Pliny,  to  Tertullian,  and  evidently  has  the  Martyrium  Ignatii , and  some 
of  the  epistles  of  Ignatius,  before  him.  For  the  martyrdom  of  Symeon  bishop 
of  Jerusalem  he  refers  to  Hegesippus. 


296 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


considerate  pace  at  which  the  government  was  of  itself  dis- 
posed to  move.1 

The  Eastern  provinces,  at  this  juncture,  might  well  require 
the  presence  of  the  emperor  in  person.  A new,  an  increasing, 

and  apparently  a dangerous  society,  was  striking 

The  presence  rl  J J 

of  Trajan  in  root,  and  spreading  its  branches  abroad  beyond 

the  East  de-  ’ 1 ° J 

manded  by  the  the  ACgean.  Its  members,  while  professing  out- 

state  of  affairs.  ° 1 ' . 

ward  obedience  to  the  government,  avoided 
public  offices,  secluded  themselves  from  the  mass  of  the  peo- 
ple, held  and  disseminated  opinions  of  doubtful  import,  in 
which  the  majesty  of  Caisar,  as  well  as  the  deity  of  Jupiter, 
was  secretly  despised,  if  not  openly  abjured.  On  the  one 
hand  there  was  the  peril  of  combination — for  the  Christians 
were  even  more  closely  united  than  the  Jews — on  the  other, 
there  was  the  peril  of  enthusiasm,  ever  hateful  and  suspicious 
to  a centralized  machine  of  administration.  From  city  to 
city,  and  in  the  less  conspicuous  recesses  of  the  country  vil- 
lages, sophists  and  hierophants,  conjurors  and  wonder-workers, 
moved  by  stealth  or  openly,  and  sowed  the  elements  of  dis- 
content and  disturbance.  The  Jews  had  repeatedly  proved 
themselves  the  most  obstinate  opponents  of  the  Ctesars,  and 
they  were  even  now  plainly  intent  on  forming  fresh  combina- 
tions : the  Christians  appeared  to  share  the  obstinacy  of  the 
Jews,  while  they  inflamed  it  with  a new  and  still  more 
fervent  fanaticism.  In  the  background  of  this  fermenting 
mass  lay  the  formidable  power  of  the  Parthians,  ever  ready 
to  harbour  exiles,  to  encourage  malcontents,  and  to  plot 
against  the  interests  of  the  empire.  To  encounter  the  overt, 
to  bring  to  light  the  hidden  dangers  of  the  time,  the  staff  of 
proconsuls  and  procurators,  even  Avhen  supported  by  the 
legions,  was  insufficient.  The  crisis  demanded  the  august 

1 Mosheim  puts  this  habitual  policy  in  a clear  light  in  speaking  on  this  sub- 
ject: De  rebus  Christ,  sebc.  ii.  c.  xi.  note:  “ sociatse  plebis  postulationes  reji- 
cere  prassides  non  audebant,  ne  seditioni  locum  facerent : deinde  veteri  Roman- 
orum  jure  sive  consuetudine  sic  comparatum  erat  . . . . ut  plebs  quoties  ad 
ludos  publicos  ....  conveniret,  ab  Imperatore  ac  prresidibus  quas  vellet  pe 
tere  posset : quse  petitiones  repudiari  nullo  modo  poterant.” 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


297 


presence  and  the  complete  authority  of  the  master  of  both 
the  soldiers  and  the  people  of  Rome. 

It  was  not,  accordingly,  we  may  believe,  from  mere  rest- 
less love  of  enterprise,  nor  from  the  ambition  so  often  present 
lo  the  mind  of  Roman  commanders,  of  rivalling 

1 . Interference  of 

the  great  Eastern  conquerors,  but  from  a convic-  the  rarthians 

. . . . _ „ with  Armenia. 

tion  of  the  importance  of  the  crisis  to  the  weliare 
of  the  empire,  that  Trajan  relinquished  the  ease  he  had  earned 
by  his  Dacian  exploits,  and  plunged  again,  towards  the  close 
of  his  career,  into  the  feverish  excitement  of  a great  national 
struggle.  But  the  ostensible  motive  of  the  war  on  which  he 
now  entered  was  the  interference  of  the  Parthians  with  the 
affairs  of  Armenia.  Vologesus,  as  we  have  seen,  had  accept- 
ed the  terms  imposed  on  him  by  Hero,  and  had  been  perhaps 
too  deeply  impressed  with  the  power  and  magnificence  he 
had  witnessed  at  Rome  to  venture  to  tamper  with  them. 
Tiridates,  king  of  Armenia,  continued  to  hold  his  crown  in 
acknowledged  dependence  on  the  empire  of  the  West. 
When,  however,  the  succession  to  the  Roman  purple  was  in 
dispute,  Pacorus  II.,  the  son  and  successor  of  Vologesus,  did 
not  scruple  to  take  open  part  with  a pretender  to  the  Arme- 
nian throne.  The  object,  indeed,  of  his  favour  proved  un- 
successful. Vespasian,  though  compelled  to  dissemble  while 
his  own  fortunes  were  in  the  balance,  was  jealous  and  angry. 
By  the  time  that  he  had  established  his  power  he  had  become 
weary  of  fighting  ; nor,  indeed,  was  the  position  of  affairs  at 
home  favourable  to  an  arduous  and  expensive  struggle. 
Titus  reposed  on  his  Judean  laurels,  and  could  afford  to 
overlook  the  slight.  Domitian,  in  his  turn,  regarded  with 
the  apathy  of  a feeble  understanding  the  insults  of  so  distant 
a rival.  Pacorus  was  emboldened  by  impunity,  and  carried, 
it  was  said,  his  defiance  so  far  as  to  form  relations  with  De- 
cebalus,  gathering  up  the  threads  of  alliance  which  had  con- 
nected Mithridates  of  old  with  the  barbarian  chiefs  beyond 
the  Tanais  and  Borysthenes.  He  seems,  however,  to  have 
stood  in  awe  of  the  martial  character  of  Trajan,  and  to  have 
refrained  from  sending  aid  to  the  Dacian  prince  on  the 


298 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


Danube,  and  from  effecting  a diversion  in  bis  favour  by  an 
attack  on  tbe  side  of  tbe  Euphrates.  His  movements  were 
confined  to  redoubled  efforts  for  tbe  extension  of  the  Pai  thi- 
an  influence  over  Armenia.  After  tbe  death  of  Pacorus  bis 
brother  Chosroes  pursued  tbe  same  policy,  and  ventured  to 
recommend  a son  of  tbe  deceased  king  of  Parthia,  named 
Exedares,  to  fill  the  vacant  throne  of  Tiri dates.  But  Trajan 
bad  now  completed  tbe  subjugation  of  Dacia, 

Resisted  by  1 J & ’ 

Trajan.  and  was  at  leisure  to  demand  reparation  for  this 

insult.  Armenia,  be  declared,  was  the  vassal  of 
Home,  not  of  Parthia.  She  must  accept  her  kings  from  tbe 
master  of  tbe  legions  which  bad  so  often  sprung  from  tbe 
Euphrates  to  the  Araxes,  and  given  proof  of  their  power  to 
annex,  if  so  it  pleased  their  leaders,  the  whole  realm  to  the 
empire.  Chosroes  was  alarmed  at  the  menaces  addressed  to 
him,  and  still  more  at  the  promptitude  with  which  his  oppo- 
nent rushed  towards  the  scene  of  action.  He  sent  envoys  to 
meet  Trajan  at  Athens,  and  assured  him  that  he  had  already 
compelled  Exedares,  whom  he  represented  as  equally  faithless 
to  both  powers,  to  descend  from  the  throne.  At  the  same 
time,  however,  he  presumed,  it  seems,  to  suggest  the  substi- 
tution of  Parthamasiris,  another  son  of  Pacorus,  for  the  un- 
worthy Exedares,  only  asking  the  Roman  emperor  to  invest 
him  with  the  diadem,  instead  of  bestowing  it  himself.  It 
appeared,  however,  that  Trajan  had  other  ends  in  view  than 
to  settle  a matter  of  ceremonial  with  the  king  of  Parthia.  He 
was  resolved  to  establish  the  supremacy  of  Rome  throughout 
the  East,  by  some  notable  exploits,  and,  old  though  he  now 
was,  he  would  not  sutler  his  plans  to  be  frustrated  by  a 
premature  accommodation.1 * *  He  rejected  the  presents  with 
which  Chosroes  had  accompanied  his  overtures,  and  deigned 
to  make  no  other  reply  to  his  proposals  but  that  the  friend- 
ship of  princes  should  be  estimated  by  deeds,  rather  than  by 

1 The  age  of  Trajan  in  114  was  sixty-two  years.  Julian,  Cm.  p.  328  a,  re 

fers  to  his  advanced  age : •k poQ  Uapdvaiovg  irplv  pev  aSiKelodai  Trap’  avrav  ovn 

^6pj]v  Seiv  xpV crtfa4  5tt2.ois‘  admovai  6e  imgijMov,  ovdb  vtto  ttjc  %Auda( 

Kulvddg  • na'iToi  8l56vtuv  uoi  tuv  vdpoiv  to  prj  arpareijecdai. 


A.  U.  60b J 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


299 


words,  and  that,  when  he  arrived  himself  in  Syria,  he  would 
act  as  befitted  the  occasion.  With  these  ominous  words  he 
dismissed  the  courtiers  of  Chosroes,  and  con-  frr,ljan  arrives 
tinued  his  progress  through  Asia  and  Cilicia,  at  -'“tioc]l- 
till  he  finally  arrived,  towards  the  close  of  the  year  114,  at 
the  1 eadquarters  of  the  Roman  government  in  Antioch.1 

While  awaiting  the  season  for  military  movements,  re- 
storing the  strictness  of  military  discipline,  and  superintend- 
ing the  details  of  the  civil  administration  of  the  Earthquake  at 
East,  a calamity  occurred  which  might  have  Antioch- 
daunted  the  courage  of  a less  resolute  ruler.  It  was  in  the 
course  of  this  same  winter,  early  in  the  year  115,  according 
to  the  most  exact  chronology,  that  the  splendid  capital  of 
Syria  was  visited  by  an  earthquake,  one  of  the  most  disas- 
trous apparently  of  all  the  similar  inflictions  from  which  that 
luckless  city  has  periodically  suffered.  The  commotion  of 
the  elements,  the  overthrow  of  edifices,  and  destruction  of 
multitudes  of  people  in  the  ruins,  are  described  with  great 
emphasis  by  Dion,  who  adds,  that  the  calamity  was  enhanced 
by  the  presence  of  unusual  crowds  from  all  the  cities  of  the 
East,  assembled  to  pay  homage  to  the  emperor,  or  to  take 
part  in  his  expedition.  Among  the  victims  were  many  Ro- 
mans of  distinction,  including  Pedo,  one  of  the  consuls  for 
the  year,  who  had  just  entered  on  his  office.  Trajan  himself 
only  escaped  by  creeping  through  a window,  with  the  assist- 
ance of  a man  of  gigantic  stature,  who  was  evidently  sup- 
posed to  have  been  some  divine  protector.  The  population 
were  compelled  to  encamp,  in  that  inclement  season,  in  the 
Circus,  while  Mount  Casius,  the  lofty  eminence  which  towers 
above  the  city,  and  seems  almost  to  impend  over  it,  appeared, 
to  their  excited  imaginations,  to  be  shaken  by  the  violence 
of  the  repeated  shocks,  and  trembled  as  if  about  to  fall  and 
jverwhelm  the  remnants  of  the  ruin.2 

1 Dion,  lxviii.  17.  Francke,  Gesch.  Traj.  p.  261,  foil.  Clinton,  Fast.  Rom. 

2 Dion,  lxviii.  25.  The  earthquake  at  Antioch  is  reckoned  by  Orosius, 
along  with  other  calamities  of  the  same  nature,  as  a divine  judgment  on  the 
persecution  of  the  Christians.  “ Terr®  motu  quatuor  urbes  Asiae  subversse  . 


300 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  115 


The  events  of  Trajan’s  expedition  into  the  East,  the  most 
brilliant  in  the  extent  and  rapidity  of  its  conquests  of  any 
exploit  of  the  Roman  arms,  though  doomed  to 

Trajan's  expe-  x.  . . ’ ° 

dition  into  Ar-  ominous  obscuration  at  its  close,  may  be  divided, 
brief  as  was  the  interval  it  embraced,  into  two 
portions.  The  first  of  these  includes,  as  the  work  of  a few 
months  only,  the  annexation  of  Armenia  to  the  Roman  do- 
minions, and  the  consolidation  of  the  Roman  power  through- 
out the  regions  between  the  Euxine  and  the  Caspian,  the 
Euphrates  and  the  Caucasus.  Our  authorities,  indeed,  are  here 
confused  and  fragmentary,  and  it  is  only  as  a choice  of  diffi- 
culties that  we  accept  the  arrangement  and  chronology  which 
seem  best  accredited.  The  commencement  of  the  year  115 
was  no  doubt  occupied  with  preparations  for  a great  military 
progress,  and  the  emperor’s  advance  must  have  been  retarded 
by  the  disaster  at  Antioch.  But  the  legionaries,  whose  habits 
of  endurance  had  been  relaxed  under  the  enervating  climate 
of  Syria,  required  to  be  guided  with  a strong  hand,  and 
Trajan  did  not  hesitate  to  keep  the  field  through  the  summer 
heats.1  As  he  advanced  from  the  Syrian  capital  to  the  Ar- 
menian frontier,  he  received  the  petty  princes  of  the  regions 
on  his  route,  and  accepted  their  homage  and  their  gifts  with 
the  air  of  an  Oriental  potentate.  Ascending  the  stream  of 

et  Grsecorum  civitates  duo  . . . Tres  Galatise  civitates  eodem  terrse  motu  di- 
rutas  . . . Pantheon  Romoe  fulmine  concrematum.”  We  can  easily  suppose 
that  the  Christians  were  conscious  that  the  persecutions  they  now  suffered  were 
connected  with  these  portentous  disasters.  The  Pagans,  on  the  other  hand, 
were  deeply  impressed  with  them,  as  judgments  requiring  peculiar  methods  of 
expiation.  Thus  the  survivors  at  Antioch  erected  a temple  in  their  beautiful 
suburb  of  Daphne  to  Zeus  the  Saviour.  Francke,  Gesch.  Traj.  p.  268.,  from 
Malelas  and  Eustathius.  A fresh  outbreak  of  the  Jews  in  Egypt  and  Cyrene 
at  this  juncture  may  perhaps  be  also  referred  to  the  excitement  which  followed 
on  the  catastrophe  at  Antioch.  See  Oros.  1.  c.  Euseb.  Hist.  Eccl.  iv.  2. 

1 The  indiscipline  of  the  Syrian  legions  and  the  vigorous  measures  of  Tra- 
jan are  painted  in  strong  colours  by  Fronto,  Princip.  Hist  in  Opp.  Ined.  ii. 
840. : “ corruptissimi  vero  omnium  Syriatici  milites,  seditiosi,  contumaees,  apud 
signa  infrequentes  . . . Tantam  militaris  disciplinse  labem  coercuit,  industria 
sua  ad  militandum  exemplo  proposita,”  etc. 


A.  U 866.. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


SOI 


the  Euphrates  from  the  Roman  outpost  at  Zeugma,  he  occu- 
pied the  passages  of  that  river  at  Samosata  and  Elegia ; and 
here,  on  the  frontier  of  the  Greater  Armenia,  he  awaited  the 
arrival  of  Parthamasiris,  whom  he  had  summoned  to  attend 
him.1  The  pretender  to  the  throne  of  Armenia  alfected  in- 
dependence, and  instead  of  appearing  in  person,  took  the 
liberty  of  sending  envoys  to  confer  with  the  rival  chieftain. 
Trajan  refused  to  admit  the  vassals  of  a vassal  into  his  pres- 
ence, and  Parthamasiris,  now  thoroughly  alarmed,  was  com- 
pelled to  repair  himself  to  the  Roman  quarters.  Dignified  be- 
The  Parthian,  however,  though  no  match  for  a thamnSris,  the" 
Roman  enemy  in  the  field,  was  a bold  and  mag-  fntto the°laim' 
nanimous  adversary.  Pie  advanced  gallantly,  tlironc- 
with  a small  retinue,  to  the  emperor’s  tribunal  in  the  centre 
of  the  camp.  Taking  the  diadem  from  his  own  brows  he 
laid  it  at  Trajan’s  feet ; then,  drawing  himself  up,  he  stood 
in  dignified  silence,  expecting  that  this  mute  submission 
would  be  accepted  in  place  of  humiliating  declarations,  and 
that  the  emblem  of  sovereignty  would  be  returned  to  him. 
But  at  the  sight  of  this  expressive  act  of  homage  from  the 
son  of  the  once  terrible  Pacorus,  the  whole  army  raised  a 
shout  and  loudly  saluted  Trajan  as  Imperator,  and  victor  of 
a bloodless  field.  The  Parthian  was  startled  by  this  sudden 
tumult,  and  apprehended  danger  to  his  person.  Turning 
about  to  retire,  he  found  himself  surrounded  and  retreat  in- 

1 Some  of  our  geographers  suppose  the  existence  of  two  places  of  the  name 
of  Elegia,  one  corresponding  to  a modern  Ilidjeh,  the  other  to  Iz-Oghlu.  I find 
the  latter  only  in  Kiepert’s  elaborate  map  of  Asia  Minor,  placed  on  the  right 
or  Roman  bank  of  the  Euphrates,  just  above  the  spot  where  the  river  falls  into 
the  defiles  of  the  Taurus,  as  Samosata  stands  just  below  them.  Perhaps  this 
spot  is  more  strictly  in  Cappadocia  than  in  the  Lesser  Armenia,  which  are  com- 
monly represented  as  separated  by  the  stream  of  the  Tokhmah-Sir  ; but  on  this 
matter  we  have  no  precise  information.  In  Dion,  Ixxi.  2.,  a Roman  force  is 
said  to  be  cut  to  pieces,  a.  d.  162,  by  the  Parthians  at  Elegia  in  Armenia;  and 
this  Elegia  can  only  be  the  frontier  station  on  the  Euphrates,  as  Armenia  Ma- 
jor, which  was  annexed  to  the  empire  in  116,  was  relinquished  a few  years 
.ater,  and  no  Roman  force  would  he  quartered  within  it.  I am  inclined,  there 
fore,  to  believe  in  only  one  Elegia. 


302 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.D.  115. 


tercepted.  He  once  more  confronted  the  emperor,  and  de- 
manded a private  interview,  that  any  degrading  concessions 
required  of  him  might  at  least  he  made  out  of  the  sight  both 
of  his  friends  and  his  enemies.  He  was  then  led,  courteously 
as  it  would  seem  in  the  first  instance,  into  the  pnetorium; 
but  the  terms  he  offered  were  not  sufficient.  Trajan  used  no 
forbearance  to  the  rival  now  in  his  power.  He  would  be 
be  satisfied  with  no  less  than  the  cession  of  his  country,  and 
even  this  capitulation  must  be  accompanied  with  galling  in- 
dignities. The  emperor  again  ascended  his  tribunal,  and 
Parthamasiris,  frustrated  in  a second  attempt  to  escape,  was 
now  led  as  a captive  before  him,  and  required  to  pronounce 
his  submission  in  public,  that  no  false  account  of  the  circum- 
stances might  be  suffered  to  transpire.  The  Parthian,  in  this 
extremity,  maintained  his  self-possession.  He  proudly  af- 
firmed that  he  was  neither  captured  nor  conquered ; but  had 
come  of  his  own  accord,  as  Tiridates  had  come  to  Nero,  to 
confer  on  equal  terms  with  a generous  rival.  Trajan  curtly 
replied,  with  the  effrontery  of  a Paullus  or  a Pompeius,  that 
Armenia  was  a Roman  dependency,  and  that  he  would  give 
its  crown  to  none,  but  would  place  it  under  a governor  from 
Rome.  Parthamasiris  and  his  countrymen  were  then  di- 
rected to  leave  the  camp,  but  a Roman  squadron  was  given 
him  as  an  escort,  to  prevent  his  communicating  with  the 
native  chiefs  on  his  route  homewards.  His  Armenian  at- 
tendants were,  however,  detained ; for  they  were  now  pro- 
nounced to  be  Roman  subjects,  and  to  owe  no  allegiance  to 
the  foreign  intruder.1 

Even  from  Dion’s  account,  which  has  been  thus  repeated, 
meagre  as  it  is,  we  are  led  to  apprehend  that  Trajan’s  con- 
duct was  marked  with  a contemptuous  disregard 

Treacherous 

slaughter  of  of  the  treatment  due  to  a fair  and  open  enemy. 

Parthamasiris.  . . ..  ^ . 

b rom  the  casual  expression,  indeed,  of  an  obscure 
writer,  it  has  been  long  inferred  that  Parthamasiris  actually 
perished ; 3 and  the  fragments  of  a contemporary  history 

1 Dion,  lxviii.  18-20. 

3 Eutrop.  viii.  3. ; “ Parthamasire  occiso,”  to  which  we  may  now  add  the 


A.  U.  868.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


303 


lately  discovered,  leave  no  doubt  of  tbe  fact,  that  the  dismis- 
sal of  Parthamasiris  was  only  a feint,  and  that  the  emperor 
took  care  to  have  him  again  arrested,  and  when  he  resisted 
and  flew  to  arms,  caused  him  to  be  brutally  slain.  While  in 
many  respects  the  public  morality  of  the  Romans  was  puri- 
fied by  their  long  civilization,  it  must  be  acknowledged  that 
in  the  treatment  of  their  foes  they  had  made  little  advance 
either  in  clemency  or  good  faith.  But  this  sharp  and  sudden 
blow  was  successful.  Parthamasiris  may  have  had  no  firm 
footing  in  the  country  over  which  he  had  usurped  dominion. 
The  Armenians,  finding  that  they  had  no  choice  but  between 
submission  to  Rome  or  to  Parthia,  may  have  preferred  the 
rule  of  a proconsul  to  that  of  a satrap.  At  all  events,  they 
yielded  without  a blow.  The  Greater  and  the  Both  the  Ar. 
Lesser  Armenia  were  now,  for  the  first  time,  an-  to  the 

nexed  to  the  empire,  and  reduced  to  the  form  of  Eoman  empire, 
a province.  The  Roman  standards  were  planted  on  the 
shores  of  the  Caspian.  Araxes  chafed  in  vain  against  the 
piers  of  a Roman  bridge.  While  these  arrangements  were  in 
progress  the  conqueror  turned  northward,  and  reached  the 
hill-station  of  Satala  on  the  Lycus,  which  commanded  the 
road  into  the  wild  districts  on  the  eastern  shores  of  the  Eux- 
ine.  Here  he  received  the  homage  of  the  Heniochi,  and  gave 
a king  to  the  Albani.  Here  he  graciously  accepted  the  alli- 
ance of  the  Iberi,  the  Sauromatse,  and  the  tribes  of  the  Cim- 
merian Bosphorus.  He  might  hope,  perhaps,  to  close  the 
sources  of  the  perennial  stream  of  l\r omade  savagery  which 
ever  broke  against  the  frontiers  of  his  Dacian  provinces.  But 
the  Romans  were  pleased  to  hear  once  more  the  names  of  cli- 
ents and  tributaries  over  whom  their  great  Pompeius  had 
triumphed  in  the  good  old  days  of  conquest;  and  they  ex- 
claimed with  exultation,  that  under  the  bravest  of  her  em- 
perors, Rome  again  squared  at  the  world.1 

supplemental  testimony  of  Cornelius  Fronto  ( Printip . Hist.  p.  349.):  “ Trajano 
cedes  Parthamasiris  regis  supplicis  haud  satis  excusata;  tametsi  ultro  ille  vim 
caeptans,  tumultu  orto,  merito  interfectus  est,  meliore  tamen  Romanorum  fama 
impune  supplex  abisset  quam  jure  supplicium  luisset.” 

1 Thus  I venture  to  translate  the  pugilistic  metaphor  cf  Rufus.  Bret  iat 


304 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.D.  115. 


The  subsequent  exploits  of  Trajan  were  compressed  with- 
in a very  short  space  of  time,  and  we  are  led  to  suppose  that 
, before  the  close  of  this  eventful  year,  he  launched 

Further  acqm-  . . . 

Bitions  in  Meso-  Ins  victorious  leguons  a^amst  the  centre  of  the 

potamia.  0 . . 

Parthian  power.  The  direction  of  his  march  may 
be  traced  perhaps  by  the  titles  of  the  princes  whose  submis- 
sion he  successively  received.  At  the  head  of  these  was 
Abgarus,  king  of  Edessa,  at  the  first  stage  on  the  road  which 
crossed  Mesopotamia  from  Zeugma  to  Nineveh.  The  next 
in  order  was  Sporaces,  phylarch,  as  he  is  called,  of  Anthe- 
musia,  a town  of  Macedonian  origin  on  the  river  Chaboras. 
His  route  then  was  the  same  which  had  proved  fatal  to  Cras- 
sus;  but  Trajan  was  an  abler  captain  than  the  luckless  tri- 
umvir, and  he  was  more  fortunate,  also,  in  having  a less  able 
enemy  to  contend  with.  The  Parthian  kings,  though  still 
bold  in  language  and  haughty  in  their  pretensions,  were  at 
this  time  broken  in  power  ; the  spirit  of  their  nation  was  well 
nigh  exhausted,  and  their  realm  was  ready  to  fall  a prey  to 
any  resolute  assailant.  Trajan,  indeed,  won  his  way  by  in- 
trigue as  much  as  by  the  power  of  his  arms.  His  interview 
with  the  young  son  of  Abgarus,  in  which  he  affected  to  pull 
the  prince  playfully  by  the  ears,  exemplifies  the  trivialities  to 
which  a victorious  emperor  would  descend,  when  it  was  more 
convenient  to  deceive  than  to  threaten  his  victim.  The  do- 
minions of  these  petty  chiefs  were  not  less  surely  absorbed 
in  the  new  provinces  which  the  invader  added  to  his  empire. 

From  thence,  taking  advantage  of  the  feuds 

Trajan  crosses  ...  . _ 

the  Tigris,  and  subsisting  between  the  Parthian  (Jhosroes  and 

creates  the  new  , _ r _ r . 

province  of  his  vassals,  Maunus  and  Manisarus,  the  invader 
pushed  on  to  Singara,  took  Nisibis,  bridged  the 
Tigris,  and  in  spite  of  the  desultory  resistance  of  the  moun- 

c.  21.:  “movit  lacertos.”  Eutrop.  1.  c. : “Armeniam  . . . recepit.  Albanis 
regem  dedit.  Iberorum  regem  et  Sauromatorum  et  Bosporanoram,  Osdroeno- 
rum  et  Colchorum  in  fidem  recepit.  Carduenos  et  Marcomedos  occupavit.” 
Comp.  Plin.  Epist.  x.  13-15.  The  occupation  of  Satala  is  mentioned  by  Dion, 
Ixviii.  19.,  but  the  order  of  events  is,  as  I have  said,  much  confused  in  this 
writer’s  remains. 


A.  U.  868.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


305 


tain  tribes  (for  the  Parthian  king  seems  to  have  led  no 
army  to  oppose  him),  planted  himself  firmly  in  the  region 
of  Adiabene.1 2  The  resistance  of  the  Parthians  was  paralysed 
by  intestine  divisions;  the  Romans  marched  triumphantly 
from  station  to  station ; and  before  the  end  of  the  year  Tra- 
jan had  created  the  new  province  of  Assyria,  stretching 
beyond  the  Tigris  to  the  mountain  ridge  of  Choatres  and 
Zagrus,  and  including  the  modern  Kurdistan.  The  title  of 
Parthicus  was  well  bestowed  on  the  achiever  of  so  splendid 
a conquest,  who  had  thus  won  for  the  City  of  the  West  the 
sites  of  Alexander’s  greatest  victories,  Arbela  and  Gauga- 
mela.3 

Trajan  passed  the  ensuing  winter  at  Nisibis  or  Edessa. 
His  ardent  soul,  still  glowing  beneath  the  weight  of  years, 
was  inflamed  with  the  prospect  of  easy  and  un-  Trajan  de- 
limited conquests  in  remotest  Asia.  From  the  p^atesftaiSs" 
Euphrates  to  the  Indus,  all  the  tribes  of  the  far  suMues°thenti 
East  were  fluttering  with  the  anticipation  of  his  Parjhn™ii6 
descent  upon  them.3  Vast  preparations  were  A-r-  869- 
made,  and  a mighty  armament  was  wafted  in  the  spring  of 
116  down  the  Euphrates,  and  the  flotilla  itself  transported 
by  simple  machinery  across  the  neck  of  land  which  separates 
the  Euphrates  from  the  Tigris,  in  order  to  arrive  at  Ctesi- 
phon.4  This  great  city,  the  residence  of  the  Parthian  sultans, 

1 Dion,  lxviii.  26. : v-no  to  lap  virr/x&r/-  I can  hardly  reconcile  this  mark 
of  time  with  the  circumstances  detailed,  whether  we  suppose  the  passage  of 
the  Tigris  to  take  place  in  115  or  116.  I have  supposed  in  the  text  that 
this  was  the  termination  of  the  campaign  of  115,  and  that  Trajan  descended 
the  Tigris  or  the  Euphrates  in  the  spring  of  the  following  year. 

2 The  title  of  Parthicus  does  not  appear  on  Trajan’s  medals  in  this  year 
(115);  but  some  time  must  be  allowed  for  the  news  of  his  last  exploits  to 
reach  Rome.  On  the  conquest  of  Ctesiphon,  in  the  ensuing  year,  the  army 
s raid  to  confirm  the  title,  as  though  it  had  been  already  given.  Dion,  lxviii. 
28. : rrjv  inUOiTjaLv  tov  ILapdiKov  ePe(3i&>(raTo. 

3 Victor,  De  Ccesar.  13. : “ Ad  ortum  Solis  cunct®  gentes  quae  inter  Indum 
et  Euphratem  sunt  bello  concuss®.” 

4 Dion,  lxviii.  28. : vKepeveynibv  ra  tcK oia  oibcoif,  i.  e.  on  rollers  covered 
with  greased  skins.  Comp.  Eor.  Od.  i.  4.  2.  The  canals  which  formerly  led 


306 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  118. 


at  once  opened  its  gates ; tlie  army  saluted  tlieir  chief  as 
Imperator,  and  confirmed  the  title  of  Parthicus.  The  inde- 
pendence of  the  great  monarchy,  ooce  Rome’s  only  rival, 
seemed  for  a moment  extinguished.  The  long  fled  into  the 
interior  of  Media,  hut  the  Roman  forces  under  Trajan’s 
lieutenants  pursued  him  as  far  as  Susa,  and  there  captured 

his  daughter  and  his  golden  throne.  Leaving 

Trajan  launches  T . ° - . P ° 

on  the  Persian  to  Lusius  Quietus,  to  J ulius  Alexander,  and  to 

Erucius  Clarus  the  complete  reduction  of  these 
regions,  and  more  particularly  of  Seleucia  on  the  Tigris,  a 
city  Avhose  Grecian  liberties  even  the  Parthian  monarchs  had 
respected,  Trajan  descended  in  person  the  stream  of  the  now 
united  rivers,  and  launched  his  bark  on  the  Persian  Gulf. 
His  restless  imagination  was  not  yet  satisfied.  He  could  not 
repress  the  puerile  ambition  of  emulating  the  first  European 
conqueror  of  the  East,  and  leading  his  legions  to  the  ocean 
on  which  the  triremes  of  Alexander  had  floated.  Seeing 
a vessel  laden  for  India,  and  about  to  sail,  he  exclaimed, 
Were  I yet  young,  I would  not  stop  till  I too  had  reached 
the  limits  of  the  Macedonian  conquest.1  But  the  hand  of 
fate  was  already  upon  him,  and  had  he  really  breathed  so 
wild  am  aspiration,  the  circumstances  of  the  realm  he  had 
left  behind  him  must  have  speedily  dispelled  his  delusions. 

from  the  Euphrates  to  the  Tigris  had  silted  up  under  the  negligent  govern- 
ment of  the  Parthians,  and  the  Euphrates  constantly  overflowing  its  banks 
had  converted  these  once  fertile  tracts  into  a morass.  It  is  true,  as  Dion  re- 
marks, that  the  bed  of  this  river  is  higher  in  its  mid  course  than  that  of  th« 
Tigris;  but  by  skilful  engineering,  a portion  of  the  higher  stream  had  for 
merly  been  conveyed  safely  into  the  lower.  Comp.  Arrian.  Anab.  Alex.  vii.  7 
1 Dion,  lxviii.  28. ; Eutrop.  viii.  2. ; Julian,  Cces.  p.  22. : In eSe'uawei  avrnii 
t6  re  Terucdv  aai  to  IlapdiKov  Tptiraiov  titmto  de  to  yypag,  ovk  eTUTplijia* 
aiiTiS  Tolg  Hapdiicois  npaypaaiv  Francke,  Gesch.  Trajans. , p.  289. 

This  writer  places  Trajan’s  visit  to  the  Persian  Gulf  in  117.  If  this  could  be 
admitted,  the  descent  of  the  Euphrates  might  be  assigned  to  the  spring  of 
116 ; but  it  seems  to  me  not  to  allow  time  enough  for  the  return  to  Ctesi- 
phon  and  transactions  there  previous  to  the  journey  homeward.  See  below 
In  either  case  there  is  no  pretence  for  the  assumption  of  some  modems  that 
Tra,an  launched  upon  the  Arabian  ocean. 


A.  IT.  869.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


307 


After  a few  skirmishes  with  the  tribes  on  the  coast,  the  news 
nf  defections  in  his  rear  caused  him  hastily  to  re-  Defections  in 
trace  his  steps.  Seleucia,  after  her  first  submis-  Ms  rear- 
sion,  encouraged  perhaps  by  his  absence,  had  broken  out  in 
rebellion,  and  overpowered  a Roman  army.  The  city  was 
stormed  by  Claras  and  Alexander,  and  according  to  the  his- 
torians burnt  to  the  ground ; but  this,  there  is  reason  to 
believe,  is  a gross  exaggeration.  Trajan,  however,  was 
undeceived.  He  confessed  that  the  complete  He  consents  to 
annexation  of  these  distant  regions  to  the  empire  £af°over5°nty 
was  impossible,  and  he  proceeded  to  set  up  a to  Parthia- 
puppet  of  his  own,  a Parthian  of  royal  blood,  named  Partha- 
maspates,  to  perpetuate,  under  Roman  control,  the  national 
existence.  Repairing  to  Ctesiphon,  he  assembled  the  people 
in  the  presence  of  his  army,  and  calling  the  new  candidate 
before  him,  placed  the  diadem  on  his  head,  with  a magnilo- 
quent harangue  on  the  splendour  of  his  own  achievements.1 

The  year  116  closed  with  this  pretended  settlement  of 
Parthian  affairs ; but  troubles  were  gathering  about  the  con- 
queror’s path,  and  his  own  energies  were  beginning,  perhaps, 
to  fail.  The  last  exploit  of  Trajan  was  not  a movement  in 
advance,  or  the  opening  of  another  vista  of  triumphs,  but  an 
attempt,  not  wholly  successful,  to  quell  the  defection  of  re- 
volted subjects.  The  little  fastness  of  Atra,  the  modern  El 
Hadr,  on  the  road  from  Ctesiphon  to  Singara,  though  con- 
temptible in  itself,  was  rendered  formidable  by  the  nature  of 
the  country  in  which  it  stood,  a desert  almost  destitute  of 
water,  affording  neither  food  for  men  nor  fodder  for  horses. 
The  natives  consecrated  this  city  to  the  Sun,  and  the  fierce 
rays  of  that  potent  luminary  striking  on  a dry  and  sandy 
soil,  furnished  a better  defence  than  armies  or  fortifications. 
Trajan  could  approach  the  place  only  with  a small  body  of 
soldiers,  and  though  he  succeeded  in  breaching  in  the  walls, 
he  was  unable  to  penetrate  them,  and  in  succouring  his  baf- 
fled cohorts  he  was  himself  struck  by  an  arrow.  A thunder- 

1 Dion,  lxviii.  27-30. : The  progress  and  successes  of  Trajan  may  be 
traced  on  his  existing  medals.  See  Eckhel  and  Francke,  &c. 


SOS 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.D.  lie. 


storm  with  rain  and  hail  added  to  the  confusion  of  the 
Romans ; hut  it  served,  at  least,  to  cover  their  retreat.  Their 
food  and  drink  were  poisoned  with  swarms  of  noxious  in- 
sects, and  the  chief  was  at  length  compelled  to  retire  before 
the  last  and  least  formidable  of  his  opponents.1 

Even  under  the  command  of  Trajan , that  gallant  captain , 
an  army  with  its  legate  had  been  cut  in  pieces , and  the  vic- 
torious emperor’s  return  was  neither  unmolested 

General  revolt  M 

of  the  Jews  nor  bloodless."1  Such  is  the  testimony  of  Fronto, 

throughout  the  . * 

East.  no  favourable  witness,  perhaps,  to  the  disasters 

a.d.  117.  which  clouded  the  termination  of  the  Parthian 

campaigns.  Trajan  was  now  anxious  to  make 
his  way  to  Rome.  He  still  flattered  himself  that  he  had 
effected  permanent  conquests,  and  that  the  realms  of  Arme- 
nia, Mesopotamia,  and  Assyria  beyond  the  Tigris  would  con- 
tinue, under  the  control  of  his  lieutenants,  a lasting  trophy 
of  the  Roman  Terminus.3  But  his  own  weakness  was  no 
doubt  sensibly  increasing.  He  had  not  provided  for  the 

succession,  and  with  his  habitual  deference  to  the  senate,  he 
might  shrink  from  the  odium  of  making  an  appointment  ex- 
cept in  their  presence,  or  with  their  concurrence.  Meanwhile, 
within  the  borders  of  the  empire,  sympathetic  movements  of 
revolt  responded  pulse  by  pulse  to  the  death  spasms  of  Arme- 
nia and  of  Partliia.  The  Jewish  insurrection,  so  long  impend- 

1 Dion,  lxviii.  31.  The  position  of  Atra  is  fixed  by  the  statement  of  Steph. 
Byzant.  (ex  Arrian,  xvii.  Farthic.).  ' Arpai  i r6?ug  fierat-v  E v^parov  /cat  T U 
yprjrng.  Francke,  p.  293. 

2 Fronto,  Princip.  Hist.  p.  338. : “ sed  etiam  fortissimi  imperatoris  ductu 
legatus  cum  exercitu  csesus,  et  principis  ad  triumphum  decedentis  kaudquaquam 
secura  nec  incruenta  regressio.”  It  will  be  understood  that  Fronto,  writing  un- 
der Trajan’s  successor,  is  not  indisposed  to  point  out  the  circumstances  which 
detract  from  the  great  conqueror’s  unrivalled  merits. 

3 Rufus,  Breviar.  14. : “ ad  extremum  sub  Trajano  principe  regi  majoris 
Armenia!  diadema  sublatum  est,  et  per  Trajanum  Armenia,  Mesopotamia,  As- 
syria et  Arabia  provincife  fact®  sunt.”  Eutrop.  viii.  3. : “ Seleuciam  et  Ctesi- 
phontem,  Babylonem  et  Messenios,  vicit  ac  tenuit:  usque  ad  India  fines  et 
mare  rubrum  accessit:  atque  ibi  tres  provincias  fecit,  Armeniam,  Assyriam, 
Hesopotamiam.”  Tac.  Ann.  i.  61. : “ Rom.  Imp.  quod  nunc  ad  mare  rubrum 
pntescit,”  i.  e.  the  Persian  Gulf. 


4.  U 870.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


309 


mg,  had  hurst  forth  in  several  quarters.  The  fall  of  Antioch 
was  perhaps  a signal  for  a final  appeal  to  the  Deliverer  of 
Israel.1  Once  more  the  children  of  Moses  and  David  believed 
that  heaven  had  declared  for  them  by  outward  tokens,  and 
that  their  long-destined  triumph  was  at  hand.  The  Jewish 
population  of  Palestine  and  Syria  had  not  yet  recovered  from 
its  exhaustion,  but  the  number  of  this  people  was  very  con- 
siderable in  Cyprus,  lying  over  against  Antioch,  where 
Augustus  had  granted  to  the  first  Herod  the  privilege  of 
working  the  copper  mines,  whence  the  island  derived  its 
name.  This  rich  and  pleasant  territory  had  afforded  a refuge 
to  the  Jews  of  the  continent  through  three  generations  of 
disturbance  and  alarm,  and  the  Hebrew  race  was  now  proba- 
bly not  inferior  there  in  number  to  the  native  Syrians  or 
Greeks.  On  the  first  outburst  of  a Jewish  revolt,  the  whole 
island  fell  into  the  hands  of  the  insurgents,  and  became  an 
arsenal  and  a rallying  point  for  the  insurrection,  which  soon 
spread  over  Egypt,  Gyrene,  and  Mesopotamia.  Tire  leader 
of  the  revolt  in  Cyprus  bore  the  name  of  Arte- 

. J . . Sanguinary 

mion,  but  we  know  no  particulars  of  the  war  m outbreak  in 

. „ , . Cyprus. 

this  quarter,  except  that  240,000  oi  the  native 
population  are  said  to  have  fallen  victims  to  the  exterminat- 
ing fury  of  the  insurgents.  When  the  rebellion  was  at  last 
extinguished  in  blood,  the  Jews  were  forbidden  thenceforth 
to  set  foot  on  the  island ; and  even  if  driven  thither  by  stress 
of  weather,  the  penalty  of  death  was  mercilessly  enforced 
against  them.2 

1 Orosius  sums  up  the  great  features  of  this  wide-spread  insurrection  in  a 
few  vehement  sentences : “ incredibili  deinde  motu  sub  uno  tempore  Judai, 
quasi  rabie  efferati,  per  diversas  terrarum  partes  exarserunt.  Nam  et  per  to- 
tam  Libyam  adversus  incolas  atrocissima  bella  gesserunt : quae  adeo  tunc  inter- 
fectis  cultoribus  desolata  est,  ut  nisi  postea  Hadrianus  imperator  collectas  ali- 
unde colonias  illuc  deduxisset,  vacua  penitus  terra,  abraso  habitatore,  mansis- 
set.  iEgyptum  vero  totam  et  Cyrenen  et  Thebaida  cruentis  seditionibus  turba- 
verant.  In  Alexandria  autem  commisso  prselio  victi  et  attriti  sunt.  In  Meso- 
potamia quoque  rebellantibus  jussu  Imperatoris  bellum  datum  est.  Itaque 
multa  millia  eorum  vasta  csede  deleta  sunt.  Salaminem  sane,  urbem  Cypri,  in- 
terfectis  omnibus  incolis  deleverunt.”  Oros.  vii.  12. 

2 Dion,  lxviii.  32.  The  historian’s  father  was  governor  of  Cyprus,  which 


310 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  0.  117. 


Throughout  Mesopotamia  the  movements  of  disaffection 
to  the  Roman  conquest  were  connected  with  this  Jewish  out- 
break. Lusius  Quietus,  the  best  of  Trajan’s 

Jewish  revolt  J 

to  the  Cyrenai-  generals,  charged  with  the  task  of  completing 

the  reduction  of  the  new  province,  was  especially 
enjoined  to  clear  it  of  this  element  of  perpetual  resistance.1 
On  the  coast  of  Libya  the  contest  assumed  a still  more  for- 
midable character.  The  Jewish  population  of  the  Cyrenaica 
outnumbered  the  natives,  and  the  fanaticism  which  had  been 
aroused  by  the  pretended  mission  of  Jonathan  was  fanned 
into  a fiercer  flame  by  a chief,  who  seems  to  have  borne  the 
double  name  of  Andreas  Lucullus.2  Here  the  insurgents 
were  for  a time  triumphant,  and  disgraced  their  success  by 
the  cruelties  they  committed  on  the  surprised  and  over- 
powered Cyrenians  ; for  the  hostility  of  the  Jews  in  these 
parts  was  directed  less  against  the  central  government  and 
the  Roman  residents,  than  the  native  race  with  whom  they 
always  dwelt  in  habits  of  mutual  animosity ; of  these  220,000 
are  said  to  have  perished,  many  of  them  in  torments  inflicted 
with  cannibal  ferocity.  After  every  allowance  for  the  ex- 
aggeration usual  in  such  case,  there  seems  no  reason  to  ques- 
tion the  general  truth  of  these  charges  against  the  insurgents, 
and  in  as  far  as  their  barbarity  was  wreaked  on  the  natives 
rather  than  on  the  Romans,  the  excuse  of  despair,  and  even 
of  revenge,  has  no  place.  From  Gyrene  the  flame  quickly 
spread  to  Egypt.  The  prefect  Lupus  was  worsted  in  several 
encounters,  and  shut  up  within  the  walls  of  Alexandria, 
where,  however,  he  indemnified  himself  for  his  losses  by  the 
( t massacre  of  the  Jewish  residents.  Ilis  position 
was  still  precarious,  when  Martius  Turbo  came 

was  attached  to  the  province  of  Cilicia,  and  the  statement  in  the  text  seems  to 
have  been  derived  from  special  sources. 

1 Dion,  lxviii.  33. : Euseb.  Hist.  Eccl.  iv.  2. : <5  6i  avroKp&rap  viroirrevaai 
Kal  tovq  tv  M eaoTroTafita  ’lovSa'iovg  emdr/GecBat  roiq  avrdBi , A ovk'iu  Kvfyrtp  irpo- 
eera^ev  kuKadapcu  rijc  in apx'iac;  avro'uc. 

2 Dion  calls  him  “Andreas,”  and  Eusebius  “Lucuas,”  which  may  be  ren 
dered  by  “ Lucullus.” 


A.  U.  870.  | 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


311 


from  Trajan  to  the  rescue,  and  the  frantic  resistance  of  the 
rebels  was  at  last  overcome  after  a protracted  resistance,  and 
in  a series  of  engagements.  The  historian  Appian,  in  speak- 
ing of  the  expiatory  chapel  which  was  dedicated  to  Pompeius 
at  the  foot  of  Mount  Casius,  remarks  incidentally,  This  little 
shrine  was  destroyed  in  our  own  time  by  the  Tews,  in  the 
internecine  war  which  Trajan  waged  against  them .l  Such 
was  the  fury  on  the  one  side,  such  the  vengeance  on  the 
other. 

The  report  of  these  internal  troubles  cast  a deep  gloom 
over  Trajan’s  spirit.  He  was  conscious  that  he  had  no 
longer  the  strength  to  contend  in  person  against  Tra1aiJ  returns 
them,  and  it  was  no  doubt  with  hitter  sorrow  t0  -'-ntioch- 
that  he  took  leave  of  his  armies  at  Antioch,  and  handed  over 
to  his  lieutenants  the  comrades  of  so  many  well-fought  fields. 
As  the  summer  advanced,  he  turned  his  face 

. . His  sickness  on 

again  westward  ; but  his  robust  constitution  had  Ms  return  to 
been  shattered  by  fatigue  ; possibly  the  chagrin 
of  his  last  repulse  had  aggravated  the  pestilential  vapours 
of  Atrse.  According  to  some  accounts,  he  fancied  himself 
suffering  from  poison  ; but  the  virus,  if  such  there  were,  was 
infused  into  his  system  by  the  air  and  the  climate,  not  by 
the  hand  of  man.  His  disorder  appears  to  have  assumed  the 
form  of  dropsy.  He  became  rapidly  worse,  and  could  pro- 
ceed no  further  than  Selinus  in  Cilicia,  where  he  and  death  at 
expired  on  one  of  the  first  days  of  August.  His  Seliims- 
reign,  extended  beyond  the  term  of  any  of  his  predecessors 
since  Tiberius,  numbered  nineteen  years  and  a half,  and  he 
had  reached  the  age  of  sixty-five  years,  spent  in  almost  un- 
interrupted activity.  Trajan  was  the  first  of  the  Caesars 
who  had  met  his  death  at  a distance  from  Rome  and  Italy, 
the  first  whose  life  had  been  cut  short  in  the  actual  service 
of  his  country.  Such  a fate  deserved  to  be  signalized  by  an 
extraordinary  distinction.  The  charred  remains  of  the  great- 

1 Salvador  refers  to  this  passage  (Bell.  Civ.  ii.  90.)  with  the  object  of  sig- 
nalizing the  mercilessness  of  the  Romans  ; but  this  is  the  device  of  an  advo- 
cate, and  does  not  befit  the  impartiality  of  history. 


312 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  I).  117 


est  of  the  emperors  were  conveyed  to  Rome,  and  suffered  to 
repose  in  a golden  urn,  at  the  foot  of  his  own  column,  within 
the  precincts  of  the  city.1 

But  the  thread  of  imperial  life  could  hardly  snap  without 
a jar  which  would  he  felt  throughout  the  whole  extent  of  the 
P^iis  of  the  empire.  Trajan,  like  Alexander,  had  been  cut 
questioiTof1  the  suddenly  in  the  far  East,  and,  like  Alexander, 
succession.  he  had  left  no  avowed  successor.  Several  of  his 
generals  abroad  might  advance  nearly  equal  claims  to  the 
sword  of  Trajan ; some  of  the  senators  at  home  might  deem 
themselves  not  unworthy  of  the  purple  of  Nerva.  On  every 
side  there  was  an  army  or  a faction  ready  to  devote  itself  to 
the  service  of  its  favourite  or  its  champion.  The  provinces 
lately  annexed  were  at  the  same  time  in  a state  of  ominous 
agitation  ; along  one  half  of  the  frontiers,  Britons,  Germans, 
and  Sarmatians  were  mustering  their  forces  for  invasion ; a 
virulent  insurrection  was  still  glowing  throughout  a large 
portion  of  the  empire.  Nevertheless  the  compact  body  of 
the  Roman  commonwealth  was  still  held  lirmly  together  by 
its  inherent  self-attraction.  There  was  no  tendency  to  split 
in  pieces,  as  in  the  ill-cemented  masses  of  the  Macedonian 
conquest ; and  the  presence  of  mind  of  a clever  woman  was 
well  employed  in  effecting  the  peaceful  transfer  of  power', 
and  relieving  the  state  from  the  stress  of  disruption. 

Of  the  accession  of  Publius  YElius  Hadrianus  to  the  em- 
Trajnn  fortu-  pire ; of  the  means  by  which  it  was  effected ; of 
mento/his1110'  ^je  character  and  reputation  he  brought  with 
death.  him  to  the  throne ; of  the  first  measures  of  his 

reign,  by  which  he  renounced  the  latest  conquests  of  his  pre- 
decessor, while  he  put  forth  all  his  power  to  retain  the  realms 
bequeathed  him  from  an  earlier  period,  I shall  speak  at  large 
hereafter.  It  will  be  well  to  return,  in  concluding  our  pres- 


‘ Eutropius,  viii.  5. : “ solus  omnium  intra  urbem  sepultus  est.”  The  same 
distinction  had  been  accorded  to  Julius  Cassar : “ ossa  ejus  collocata  in  urna 
aurea  in  foro  quod  oedificavit  sub  columna  sita  sunt.”  Dion,  lxix.  2. : ra 
r ov  T pa’iavov  ocra  iv  ra"  k'iovi  avrov  KaTeredjj.  The  column  seems  to  stand 
precisely  on  the  line  of  the  Servian  wall. 


i.  U.  870.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


HI  3 


ent  review  of  Eastern  affairs,  to  the  great  Jewish  insurrec- 
tion, and  the  important  consequences  which  followed  from 
it.  Trajan  was  surely  fortunate  in  the  moment  of  his  death. 
Vexed  as  he  doubtless  was,  by  the  frustration  of  his  grand 
designs  for  incorporating  the  Parthian  monarchy  with  the 
Roman,  and  fulfilling  the  idea  of  universal  empire  which  had 
flitted  through  the  mind  of  Pompeius  or  Julius,  hut  had  been 
deliberately  rejected  by  Augustus  and  Vespasian,  his  proud 
spirit  would  have  been  broken  indeed,  had  he  lived  to  wit- 
ness the  difficulties  in  which  Rome  was  plunged  at  his  death, 
the  spread  of  the  Jewish  revolt  in  Asia  and  Palestine,  the 
aggressions  of  the  Moors,  the  Scythians,  and  the  Britons  at 
the  most  distant  points  of  his  dominions.1  The  momentary 
success  of  the  insurgents  of  Cyprus  and  Cyrene  had  prompted 
a general  assurance  that  the  conquering  race  was  no  longer 
invincible,  and  the  last  great  triumphs  of  its  legions  were  fol- 
lowed by  a rebound  of  fortune  still  more  momentous.  The 
first  act  of  the  new  reign  was  the  formal  relin- 

• i „ , . . Hadrian  re- 

quishment  ol  the  new  provinces  beyond  the  Eu-  lmquishes  the 
phrates.2  The  Parthian  tottered  back  with  feeble  beyond°theCe3 
step  to  his  accustomed  frontiers.  Arabia  was 
left  unmolested ; India  was  no  longer  menaced.  Armenia 
found  herself  once  more  suspended  between  two  rival  em- 
pires, of  which  the  one  was  too  weak  to  seize,  the  other  too 
weak  to  retain  her.  All  the  forces  of  Rome  in  the  East  were 
now  set  free  to  complete  the  suppression  of  the  Jewish  dis- 
turbances. The  flames  of  insurrection  which  had  broken  out 

1 Spartian,  Hadrian.  5. : “ deficientibus  his  nationibus  quas  Trajanus  sube- 
gerat,  Mauri  lacessebant,  Sarmatie  bellum  inferebant,  Britanni  teneri  sub  Ro- 
tnana  ditione  non  poterant,  J3gy  <tus  seditionibus  urgebatur,  Lycia  denique  ao 
Palasstina  rebelles  animos  efferebant.” 

2 Spartian,  1.  c. : “ quare  omnia  trans  Euphratem  ac  Tigrim  reliquit,  exem- 
plo  ut  dicebat  Catonis,  qui  Macedonas  liberos  pronuntiavit  quia  teneri  non  po- 
terant.” See  Livy,  xlv.  18.,  who  however  gives  a different  account  of  the  mat- 
ter. Of  Hadrian’s  relinquishment  of  Dacia  I shall  speak  later.  There  seems 
no  reason  whatever  for  attributing  to  jealousy  of  Trajan  measures  which  were 
imperatively  demanded  by  the  circumstances  of  the  times.  Comp.  Eutrop, 
viii.  & Fronto,  Princip.  Hist.  p.  244. 

129 


314 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


in  so  many  remote  quarters  were  concentrated,  and  burnt 
more  fiercely  than  ever,  in  the  ancient  centre  of  the  Jewish 

nationality.  Martius  Turbo,  appointed  to  com- 

InsnrrectioD  of  . . 

the  Jews  in  mand  m Palestine,  was  equally  amazed  at  the 

PlllCStiD6.  1 x t/ 

fanaticism  and  the  numbers  of  people  whose  faith 
had  been  mocked,  whose  hopes  frustrated,  whose  young  men 
had  been  decimated,  whose  old  men,  women  and  children,  had 
been  enslaved  and  exiled.  Under  the  teaching  of  the  doctors 
of  Tiberias  faith  had  been  cherished,  and  hope  had  revived. 
Despised  and  unmolested  for  fifty  years,  a new  generation 
had  risen  from  the  soil  of  their  ancestors,  recruited  by  the 
multitudes  who  flocked  homewards  year  by  year,  with  an 
unextinguishable  love  of  country,  and  reinforced  by  the  fu- 
gitives from  many  scenes  of  persecution,  all  animated  with  a 
growing  conviction  that  the  last  straggle  of  their  race  was  at 
hand,  to  be  contested  on  the  site  of  their  old  historic  tri- 
umphs. 

It  is  not  perhaps  wholly  fanciful  to  imagine  that  the  Jew- 
ish leaders,  after  the  fall  of  their  city  and  temple,  and  the 
The  Jewish  great  dispersion  of  their  people,  deliberately  in- 
Larvedabyyti?ee"  vented  new  means  for  maintaining  their  cher- 
Jewishfioctora6  nationality.  Their  conquerors,  as  they 

at  Tiberias.  might  observe,  were  scattered,  like  themselves, 
over  the  face  of  the  globe,  and  abode  wherever  they  con- 
quered ; but  the  laws,  the  manners,  and  the  traditions  of 
Rome  were  preserved  almost  intact  amidst  alien  races  by  the 
consciousness  that  there  existed  a visible  centre  of  their  na- 
tion, the  source,  as  it  were,  to  which  they  might  repair  to 
draw  the  waters  of  political  life.  But  the  dispersion  of  the 
Jews  seemed  the  more  irremediable,  as  the  destruction  of 
their  central  home  was  complete.  To  preserve  the  existence 
of  their  nation  one  other  way  presented  itself.  In  their 
sacred  books  they  retained  a common  bond  of  law  and  doc- 
trine, such  as  no  other  people  could  boast.  In  those  ven- 
erated records  they  possessed,  whether  on  the  Tiber  or  the 
Euphrates,  an  elixir  of  unrivalled  virtue.  With  a sudden 
revulsion  of  feeling,  the  popular  orators  and  captains  betook 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


315 


themselves  to  the  study  of  the  law,  its  history  and  antiquities, 
its  actual  test  and  its  inner  meaning.  The  schools  of  Tibe- 
rias resounded  with  debate  on  the  rival  principles  of  interpre- 
tation, the  ancient  and  the  modern,  the  stricter  and  the  laser, 
known  respectively  by  the  names  of  their  teachers,  Scharn- 
mai  and  Hillel.  The  doctors  decided  in  favour  of  the  more 
accommodating  system,  by  which  the  stern  exclusiveness  of 
the  original  letter  was  extenuated,  and  the  law  of  the  rude 
tribes  of  Palestine  moulded  to  the  varied  taste  and  temper 
of  a cosmopolitan  society,  while  the  text  itself  was  embalmed 
in  the  Masora,  an  elaborate  system  of  punctuation  and  nota- 
tion, to  every  particle  of  which,  to  ensure  its  uncorrupted 
preservation,  a mystical  significance  was  attached.  By  this 
curious  contrivance  the  letter  of  the  Law,  the  charter  of 
Judaism,  was  sanctified  for  ever,  while  its  spirit  was  remod- 
elled to  the  exigencies  of  the  present  or  the  future,  till  it 
would  have  been  no  longer  recognised  by  its  authors,  or 
even  by  very  recent  disciples.  To  this  new  learning  of  tra- 
ditions and  glosses  the  ardent  youth  of  the  nation  devoted 
itself  with  a fanaticism  not  less  vehement  than  that  which 
had  fought  and  bled  half  a century  before.  The  name  of  the 
Rabbi  Akiba  is  preserved  as  a type  of  the  hierophant  of  re- 
stored Judaism.  The  stories  respecting  him  are 
best  expounded  as  myths  and  figures.  He  ter  of  the  Rabbi 
reached,  it  was  said,  the  age  of  a hundred  and 
twenty  years,  the  period  assigned  in  the  sacred  records  to 
his  prototype  the  lawgiver  Moses.  Like  David,  in  his  youth 
he  kept  sheep  on  the  mountains ; like  Jacob,  he  served  a 
master,  a rich  citizen  of  Jerusalem,  for  Jerusalem  in  his  youth 
was  still  standing.  His  master’s  daughter  cast  the  eyes  of 
affection  upon  him,  and  offered  him  a secret  marriage;  but 
this  damsel  was  no  other  than  Jerusalem  itself,  so  often  im- 
aged to  the  mind  of  the  Jewish  people  by  the  figure  of  a 
maiden,  a wife,  or  a widow.  This  mystic  bride  required  him 
to  repair  to  the  schools,  acquire  knowledge  and  wisdom,  sur- 
round himself  with  disciples ; and  such,  as  we  have  seen,  was 
the  actual  policy  of  the  new  defenders  of  Judaism.  The 


316 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


damsel  was  rebuked  by  her  indignant  father;  but  when  aftei 
the  lapse  of  twelve  years  Akiba  returned  to  claim  his  bride 
with  twelve  thousand  scholars  at  his  heels,  he  overheard  her 
replying,  that  long  as  he  had  been  absent  she  only  wished 
him  to  prolong  his  stay  twice  over,  so  as  to  double  his 
knowledge  ; whereupon  he  returned  patiently  to  his  studies, 
and  frequented  the  schools  twelve  years  longer.  Twice 
twelve  years  thus  past,  he  returned  once  more  with  twice 
twelve  thousand  disciples,  and  then  his  wife  received  him 
joyfully,  and  covered  as  she  was  with  rags,  an  outcast  and  a 
beggar,  he  presented  her  to  his  astonished  followers  as  the 
being  to  whom  he  owed  his  wisdom,  his  fame  and  his  fortune. 
Such  were  the  legends  with  which  the  new  learning  was  con- 
secrated to  the  defence  of  Jewish  nationality.1 

The  concentration  of  the  Roman  forces  on  the  soil  of  Pal- 
estine seems  to  have  repressed  for  a season  all  overt  attempts 
at  insurrection.  The  Jewish  leaders  restrained 
their  followers  from  action,  as  long  as  it  was  pos- 
sible to  feed  their  spirit  with  hopes  only.  It  was 
not  till  about  the  fourteenth  year  of  Hadrian’s 
reign  that  the  final  revolt  broke  out,  but  it  will 
be  convenient  to  embrace  it  in  our  present  review  of  the  long 
struggle  of  the  nation  throughout  the  regions  in  which  it 
was  dispersed.  When  the  Jews  of  Palestine  launched  forth 
upon  the  war,  the  doctor  Akiba  gave  place  to  the  warrior 
Barcochebas.  This  gallant  warrior,  the  last  of  the  national 
heroes,  received  or  assumed  his  title,  the  Son  of  the  Star , 
given  successively  to  several  leaders  of  the  Jewish  people,  in 
token  of  the  fanatic  expectations  of  divine  deliverance  by 
which  his  countrymen  did  not  yet  cease  to  be  animated.3 
Many  were  the  legends  which  declared  this  champion’s 
claims  to  the  leadership  of  the  national  cause.  His  size  aud 
strength  were  vaunted  as  more  than  human;  it  was  the  arm 
of  God , not  of  man , said  Hadrian, — when  he  saw  at  last  the 


Barcochebas, 
the  son  of  a 
star,  appointed 
leader  of  the 
Jews. 

A.  d.  131. 

A.  tr.  884. 


* Salvador,  Domination  Romaine  en  Judee,  ii.  54*7,  foil. 
a The  allusion  was  to  the  prophecy  of  Balaam,  Numbers , xxiv.  17  : Comp, 
Euseb.  Hist.  Eccl.  iv.  6. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


317 


corpse  encircled  by  a serpent,  that  could  alone  strike  down 
the  giant.  Flame  and  smoke  were  seen  to  issue  from  his 
lips  in  speaking,  a portent  which  was  rationalized  centuries 
later  into  a mere  conjuror’s  artifice.1  The  concourse  of  the 
Jewish  nation  at  his  summons  was  symbolized,  with  a curi- 
ous reference  to  the  prevalent  idea  of  Israel  as  a school  and 
the  Law  as  a master,  by  the  story  that  at  Bethar,  the  ap- 
pointed rendezvous  and  last  stronghold  of  the  national  de- 
fence, were  four  hundred  academies,  each  ruled  by  four 
hundred  teachers,  each  teacher  boasting  a class  of  four  hun- 
dred pupils.  Akiba,  now  at  the  extreme  point  of  his  pro- 
tracted existence,  like  Samuel  of  old,  nominated  the  new 
David  to  the  chiefship  of  the  people.  He  girded  Barcochebas 
with  the  sword  of  Jehovah,  placed  the  staff  of  command  in 
his  hand,  and  held  himself  the  stirrup  by  which  he  vaulted 
into  the  saddle.2 

The  last  revolt  of  the  Jewish  people  was  precipitated  ap- 
parently by  the  increased  severity  of  the  measures  which  the 
rebellion  under  Trajan  had  drawn  down.  They 

J J Defeat  of  the 

complained  that  Hadrian  had  enrolled  himself  as  Jews,  and 

. _ . death  of  Barco- 

a proselyte  of  the  Law,  and  were  doubly  incensed  chebas. 
against  him  as  a persecutor  and  a renegade.  This  a.  d.  132. 
assertion  indeed  may  have  no  foundation ; on  the  ^ u' 
other  hand,  it  is  not  unlikely  that  this  prince,  a curious 
explorer  of  religious  opinions,  had  sought  initiation  into  some 
of  the  mysteries  of  the  Jewish  faith  and  ritual.  But  however 
this  may  be,  he  gave  them  mortal  offence  by  perceiving  the 
clear  distinction  between  Judaism  and  Christianity,  and  by 
forbidding  the  Jews  to  sojourn  in  the  town  which  he  was 
again  raising  on  the  ruins  of  Jerusalem,  while  he  allowed  free 
access  to  their  rivals.  He  is  said  to  have  even  prohibited 
the  rite  of  circumcision,  by  which  they  jealously  maintained 

1 The  statement  rests  on  the  authority  of  St.  Jerome,  who  derides  the  im- 
posture  with  fanatical  bitterness.  In  Ruffin,  iii.  (tom.  iv.  pars  2.  p.  466.  ed, 
1706):  “ ut  ille  Barcochebas  auctor  seditionis  Judaic®  stipulam  in  ore  succen 
earn  anhelitu  ventilabat,  ut  flammas  evomere  putaretur.” 

2 Salvador,  ii.  869. ; with  citations  from  the  Talmud. 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


SI  8 


their  separation  from  the  nations  of  the  W est.  At  last,  when 
they  rose  in  arms,  he  sent  his  best  Generals  against  them. 
Tinnius  Rufus  was  long  baffled,  and  often  defeated ; hut 
Julius  Severus,  following  the  tactics  of  Yespasian,  constantly 
refused  the  battle  they  offered  him,  and  reduced  their  strong- 
holds in  succession  by  superior  discipline  and  resources.1 * 
Barcocliebas  struggled  with  the  obstinacy  of  despair.  Every 
excess  of  cruelty  was  committed  on  both  sides,  and  it  is  well 
perhaps  that  the  details  of  this  mortal  spasm  are  almost 
wholly  lost  to  us.  The  later  Christian  writers,  while  they 
allude  with  unseemly  exultation  to  the  overthrow  of  one  in- 
veterate enemy  by  another,  who  proved  himself  in  the  end 
not  less  inveterate,  affirmed  that  the  barbarities  of  the  Jew- 
ish leader  were  mainly  directed  against  themselves.  On  such 
interested  assertions  we  shall  place  little  reliance.  In  the 
counter-narrative  of  the  Jews  even  the  name  of  Christian  is 
contemptuously  disregarded.  It  relates,  however,  how  at  the 
storming  of  Bethar,  when  Barcochebas  perished  in  the  field, 
ten  of  the  most  learned  of  the  Rabbis  were  taken  and  put 
cruelly  to  death,  while  Akiba,  reserved  to  expire  last,  and 
tom  in  pieces  with  hot  pincers,  continued  to  attest  the  great 
principle  of  the  Jewish  doctrine,  still  exclaiming  in  his  death 
throes,  Jehovah  Erhad ; God  is  one? 

The  Jews  who  fell  in  these  their  latest  combats  are  counted 
by  hundreds  of  thousands,  and  we  may  conclude  that  the 
suppression  of  the  revolt  was  followed  by  san- 
guinary proscriptions,  by  wholesale  captivity,  and 
general  banishment.3  The  dispersion  of  the  un- 
happy race,  particularly  in  the  West,  was  now 
complete  and  final.  The  sacred  soil  of  Jerusa- 
lem was  occupied  by  a Roman  colony,  which 
received  the  name  of  iElia  Capitolina,  with  reference  to  the 


Foundation  of 
the  colony  of 
iElia  Capito- 
lina, and  dese- 
cration of  the 
holy  places  of 
Jerusalem. 

A.  d.  133. 

A.  V.  886. 


1 l)ion,  lxix.  13.  A.  d.  132-135:  a.  u.  885-888.  Hadrian,  16-19. 

* Salvador,  ii.  SVY. 

* Dion  specifies  the  exact  number  of  the  Jewish  people  slain  in  battle  at 
580,000,  while,  as  he  says,  the  multitudes  that  perished  by  famine  and  pesti- 
lence exceeded  all  calculation.  These  statements  are  probably  as  extravagant 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


319 


emperor  who  founded  it,  and  to  the  supreme  God  of  the 
pagan  mythology,  installed  on  the  desecrated  summits  of 
Zion  and  Moriah.  The  fane  of  Jupiter  was  erected  on  the 
site  ol  the  holy  Temple,  and  a shrine  of  Venus  flaunted,  we 
ai  e assured,  on  the  very  spot  hallowed  to  Christians  by  our 
Lord’s  crucifixion.1  But  Hadrian  had  no  purpose  of  insulting 
' be  disciples  of  Jesus,  and  this  desecration,  if  the  tradition 
he  true,  was  probably  accidental.  A Jewish  legend  afiirms 
(hat  the  figure  of  a swine  was  sculptured,  in  bitter  mockery, 
over  a gate  of  the  new  city.  The  Jews  have  retorted  with 
equal  scorn  that  the  effigy  of  the  unclean  animal,  which 
represented  to  their  minds  every  low  and  bestial  appetite, 
was  a fitting  emblem  of  the  colony  and  its  founder,  of  the 
lewd  worship  of  its  gods,  and  the  vile  propensities  of  its 
emperor.2 

The  fancy  of  later  Christian  writers,  that  Hadrian  re- 
garded their  co-religionists  with  special  consideration,  seems 
founded  on  a misconception.  W e hear,  indeed,  Final  separa. 
of  the  graciousness  with  which  he  allowed  them,  cMstiansfrom 
among  other  sectarians,  to  defend  their  usages  the  Jews- 
and  expound  their  doctrines  in  his  presence ; and  doubtless 
his  curiosity,  if  no  worthier  feeling,  was  moved  by  the  fact, 
which  he  fully  appreciated,  of  the  interest  they  excited  in 
certain  quarters  of  the  empire.  But  there  is  no  evidence 
that  his  favour  extended  further  than  to  the  recognition  of 
their  independence  of  the  Jews,  from  whom  they  now  for- 
mally separated  themselves,  and  the  discouragement  of  the 
local  persecutions  to  which  they  were  occasionally  subjected.’ 

as  those  of  Josephus.  Dion  adds,  however,  a singular  circumstance,  if  true, 
with  reference  to  the  losses  of  the  Romans,  namely,  that  in  his  dispatches  to 
the  senate,  the  emperor  was  constrained  to  omit  the  usual  formula : “ If  you 
and  yours  are  well,  it  is  well ; I and  my  army  are  well.”  Dion,  Lxix.  14. 

1 This  last  fact,  for  which  we  are  referred  to  Epiphan.  De  mens.  14.,  is  al 
lowed  to  be  doubtful  by  Gregorovius,  Eadr . p.  56. 

2 Salvador,  ii.  583. 

s Orosius,  vii.  13.,  expresses  the  favourable  opinion  commonly  entertained 
of  this  emperor  by  the  Christians,  on  the  ground  that  he  relieved  them  from 
persecution,  and  avenged  them  on  the  cruel  Barcochebas : “ pnecepitque  ne  cui 


320 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


So  far  the  bigoted  hostility  of  their  enemies  was  overruled 
at  last  in  their  favour.  In  another  way  they  learnt  to  profit 
by  the  example  of  their  rivals.  From  the  recent  policy  of 
the  Jews  they  might  understand  the  advantage  to  a scattered 
community,  without  a local  centre  or  a political  status,  of 
erecting  in  a volume  of  sacred  records  their  acknowledged 
standard  of  faith  and  practice.  The  Scriptures  of  the  New 
Testament,  like  the  Mischna  of  the  Jewish  Rabbis,  took  the 
place  of  the  Holy  of  Holies  as  the  tabernacle  of  their  God, 
and  the  pledge  of  their  union  with  Him.  The  canon  of  their 
sacred  books,  however  casual  its  apparent  formation,  was 
indeed  a providential  development.  The  habitual  references 
of  bishops  and  doctors  to  the  words  of  their  Founder,  and 
the  writings  of  his  first  disciples,  guided  them  to  the  proper 
sources  of  their  faith,  and  taught  them  justly  to  discriminate 
the  genuine  from  the  spurious.  Meagre  as  are  the  remains 
of  Christian  literature  of  the  second  century,  they  tend  to 
confirm  our  assurance  that  the  Scriptures  of  the  New  Dispen- 
sation were  known  and  recognized  as  divine  at  that  early 
period,  and  that  the  Church  of  Christ,  the  future  mistress  of 
the  world,  was  already  become  a great  social  fact,  an  empire 
within  the  empire. 

Judseo  intrandi  Hierosolymam  esset  licentia,  Christianis  tantum  civitate  per- 
missa.”  On  the  other  hand  Sulp.  Severus  speaks  very  bitterly  of  Hadrian : 
“ qua  tempestate  Hadrianus,  existimans  se  Christianam  fidem  loci  injuria  pe- 
rempturum,  et  in  templo  ac  loco  Dominic®  passionis  demonum  simulacra  con- 
stituit.  Et  quia  Christiani  ex  Judseis  potissimum  putabantur  (namque  turn 
Hierosolym®  non  nisi  ex  circumcisione  habebat  ecclesia  sacerdotem),  militum 
cohortem  custodias  in  perpetuum  agitare  jussit,  qu®  Judceos  omnes  Hierosoly 
m®  aditu  arceret.  Quod  quidem  Christian®  fidei  proficiebat,  quia  turn  pene 

omnes  Christum  Deurn  sub  observalione  legis  credebant Ita  turn  primum 

Marcus  ex  gentibus  apud  Hierosolymam  episcopus  fuit.”  Iiist.  Sacr.  ii.  45. 
This  last  fact  is  taken  from  Eusebius,  who  gives  a catalogue  of  the  twelve 
bishops,  all  of  the  circumcision,  who  had  previously  presided  over  the  churok 
at  Jerusalem.  Hist.  Ecu.  1.  c. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


S21 


CHAPTER  LXYI. 


BIRTH  AND  PARENTAGE  OF  HADRIAN. — HIS  EDUCATION  AND  ACCOMPLISHMENTS.— 
HIS  RISE  UNDER  TRAJAN’S  GUARDIANSHIP. HIS  ALLEGED  ADOPTION  AND  SUC- 

CESSION.— HE  ABANDONS  TRAJAN’S  CONQUESTS  IN  THE  EAST. — HIS  CAMPAIGN 

IN  M^ESIA,  A.  D.  118. SUPPRESSION  OF  A CONSPIRACY  AGAINST  HIM. HE 

COURTS  THE  SENATE  AND  THE  PEOPLE. — HADRIAN’S  FIRST  PROGRESS. — HE 
VISITS  GAUL,  GERMANY,  SPAIN,  MAURETANIA,  CONFERS  WITH  THE  KING  OF 
PARTHIA,  VISITS  ATHENS,  SICILY,  AND  CARTHAGE,  A.  D.  119-123. HIS  SEC- 

OND PROGRESS  : HE  RESIDES  AT  ATHENS,  ALEXANDRIA,  AND  ANTIOCH  I CHARAC- 
TER OF  LEARNING  AND  SOCIETY  AT  THESE  CITIES  RESPECTIVELY  I HE  REVISITS 

ATHENS,  AND  RETURNS  FINALLY  TO  ROME,  A.  D.  125-134. HIS  BUILDINGS  AT 

ROME. ADOPTION  OF  CEIONIUS  VERUS,  A.  D.  135,  WHO  DIES  PREMATURELY. 

ADOPTION  OF  AURELIUS  ANTONINUS,  A.  D.  138,  WHO  ADOPTS  ANNIUS  VERUS 

AND  L.  VERUS. INFIRMITIES  AND  DEATH  OF  HADRIAN,  A.  D.  138. HIS 

CHARACTER  AND  PERSONAL  APPEARANCE. (A.  D.  ll'i-138:  A.  U.  870— 891.) 

THE  family  of  the  man  who  had  now  attained  the  sover- 
eignty of  the  Roman  people,  was  derived  from  the 
obscure  municipality  of  Hadria  in  Picenum,  an  Birth  and 
olfshoot  from  the  Etruscan  city  of  Cisalpine  Gaul  empefor°Ha-° 
which  gave  its  name  to  the  Adriatic  sea.1  Three  drian- 
centuries  earlier,  a direct  ancestor  had  visited  Spain  in  the 

1 We  arrive,  with  the  reign  of  Hadrian,  at  the  series  of  imperial  biogra- 
phies which  goes  under  the  name  of  the  Historia  Augusta.  The  writers,  six  in 
number,  are  known  as  Spartianus,  Capitolinus,  Gallicanus,  Lampridius,  Trebc.- 
lius  and  Yopiscus.  It  comprises,  with  one  short  interval,  an  account  of  the 
emperors  from  the  death  of  Trajan  to  the  accession  of  Diocletian,  under  whom, 
or  not  long  after,  the  several  pieces  seem  to  have  been  written.  Of  the  writers 
themselves  little  or  nothing  is  known,  nor  are  the  limits  of  their  respective 
authorship  in  all  cases  satisfactorily  determined.  Hence  Gibbon  preferred  to 
cite  them  indiscriminately  under  the  common  title  of  the  Augustan  History. 
Of  their  value  a good  estimate  is  given  by  Professor  Ramsay  in  Smith’s  Hio 
tionary  Class.  Bioqraph.  They  follow  the  type  of  the  biographies  of  Suetonius, 


322 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


armies  of  the  Scipios,  and  had  settled  in  the  Roman  colony 
of  Italica,  where  his  descendants  continued  to  retain,  in  the 
surname  of  Hadrianus,  a memorial  of  the  place  whence  they 
originally  sprang.  The  iElian  Gens,  with  which  the  empe- 
ror claimed  connexion,  was  an  ancient  stem,  which  had 
thrown  off  many  illustrious  branches,  distinguished  in  the 
records  of  the  plebeian  nobility  of  Rome.  But  the  pride  of 
historic  descent  was  already  becoming  faint  among  the  Ro- 
mans. The  new  men,  raised  by  imperial  favour  from  the 
lowest  class  of  citizens,  and  even  from  the  ranks  of  foreign 
freedmen,  or  thrown  rip  by  the  mutations  of  fortune  from 
their  decent  obscurity  in  the  provinces,  had  so  far  outnum- 
bered the  remnant  of  really  ancient  families,  as  even  to  cast 
a slur  on  the  genuine  claims  of  birth  and  ancestral  dignity. 
The  complacent  feelings  with  which  a few  scions  of  the  old 
aristocracy  might  still  regard  their  historic  origin,  must  have 
been  sorely  lacerated  by  the  scorn  with  which  they  were 
chastised  by  Juvenal.  In  branding  their  pretensions  as  weak 
and  even  criminal,  he  spoke,  as  they  well  knew,  the  real  sen- 
timents of  the  day.1  Accordingly  Hadrian’s  flatterers  made 
apparently  no  effort  to  prove,  by  forced  or  fancied  genealo- 
gies, that  their  patron  deserved  by  his  birth  a primacy  of 
honour  among  his  countrymen.  They  were  content  that  he 

and  we  may  perhaps  rely  upon  them  generally  for  their  account  of  the  salient 
events  of  history,  and  their  views  of  character;  but  we  must  guard  against 
the  trifling  and  incredible  anecdotes  with  which  they  abound,  and  acknowledge 
their  inferiority  in  credit  even  to  the  biographies  of  the  Caesars. 

1 Juvenal,  Sat.  viii. : “ Rarus  enim  ferme  sensus  communis  in  ilia  Fortuna  . . . 
miserum  est  aliorum  incumbere  famas  . . . ergo  cavebis.  Et  metues,  ne  tu 
sis  Creticus  aut  Camerinus.” 

The  satirist  expresses  the  common  sense  and  utilitarian  logic  of  his  day, 
when  the  people  were  awakening  from  many  ancient  illusions,  the  belief  in 
which,  nevertheless,  had  constituted  the  strength  of  the  nation.  Such  a dia- 
tribe as  his  eighth  satire  is  a startling  sign  of  the  age  of  transition  to  which  it 
belonged.  We  cannot  imagine  its  being  written  even  a century  earlier.  Ti- 
berius, and  possibly  Augustus,  would  have  rejoiced  at  such  a blow  administered 
to  the  haughty  aristocracy,  which  they  flattered  and  cajoled ; but  the  times 
were  not  then  ripe  for  it.  It  would  have  been  equally  out  of  date  a centurj 
ater. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


323 


should  be  judged  by  bis  personal  merits,  and  these,  as  it 
proved,  were  unquestionably  such  as  could  be  little  enhanced 
by  the  fairest  gifts  of  fortune.  It  is  enough,  then,  to  say 
that  P.  iElius  Hadrianus  was  the  son  of  Hadrianus  Afer,  a 
first  cousin  of  Trajan.  His  mother  was  a Domitia  Paulina 
of  Gades.  His  grandfather  Marillinus  was  the  first  of  the 
family  who  attained  the  dignity  of  a senator,  and  his  sister 
Paulina  was  united  to  a man  of  great  distinction  at  Rome, 
many  years  older  than  herself,  named  Servianus.  Hadrian 
was  born  at  Rome,  Jan.  24,  a.  d.  76  (a.  it.  829),  in  the  seventh 
consulship  of  Vespasian.1 

Hadrian’s  childhood  was  spent  probably  at  Rome,  amidst 
the  high  society  of  the  capital;  and  when  he  was  left  an 
orphan  at  the  age  of  ten  years,  he  was  taken 

T , . ,.  rrt  . , . His  education 

under  the  guardianship  ot  Irajan,  then  occupying  and  accom- 
. . . . plishments. 

the  post  oi  praetorian  prelect,  and  ol  a knight 
of  good  family,  named  Attianus.3  For  five  years  he  was 
placed  under  the  fashionable  teachers  of  letters  and  philoso* 
phy  in  Greece,  and  the  success  which  attended  him  in 
these  and  other  kindred  studies,  the  boast  of  the  city  of 
Minerva;  gained  him  the  familiar  nickname  of  Grreculus.3 


1 Spartian,  Hadrian,  i.  It  will  be  convenient  to  the  reader  to  have  a sy- 
noptical view  of  the  connexion  of  the  two  emperors. 

Trajanus  (avus  Imp.  Traj.) 


Hadrianus 

Marillinus  (avus  Imp.  Hadr.)=  Ulpia 

Trajanus  (pater  Imp. 

Traj.) 

Domitia  =■  Hadrianus  Afer 

| 

| 

Paulina  | (pater  Imp.  Hadr.) 

Marciana 

1 

Traiawts 

(imp.) 

1 1 

Matidia 

1 

= Plotina 

Paulina  Hadeianijs  =Julia  Sabina 

=8ervianns  (Imp.) 


3 Spartian,  Hadr.  1.  c. : Dion,  Ixix.  1.  The  MSS.  fluctuate  between  the 
names  Attianus  and  Tatianus. 

8 Spartian,  1.  c.  This  writer,  from  whose  confused  statements  we  gather 
our  information  about  Hadrian’s  early  career,  does  not  expressly  say  that  he 
was  educated  at  Athens : “ quintodecimo  anno  ad  patriam  rediit ; ” by  which  I 
understand  “ Rome,”  where  he  rvas  bom,  where  he  soon  after  this  period  filled 


824 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


He  became  imbued , we  are  assured,  with  the  true  spirit  of  the 
Athenians , and  not  only  acquired  their  language , but  rivalled 
them  in  all  their  special  accomplishments , in  singing , in 
playing , in  medicine , tVi  mathematics , in  painting  and  in 
sculpture , in  which  he  nearly  equalled  a Polycletus  and  a 
JEhphranor.1  His  memory , it  is  added,  was  prodigious,  his 
application  incredible.  He  was  various  and  versatile  in  his 
tastes  / his  interests  were  manifold  and  many-sided.  He 
was  smart  in  attach , and  ready  in  reply  with  argument , 
abuse , or  banter.  But  the  activity  of  his  body  equalled  that 
of  his  mind,  and  besides  the  ordinary  training  in  arms  and 
feats  of  agility  which  was  proper  to  his  age  and  position,  he 
devoted  himself  with  ardour  to  the  toils  and  excitement  of 
the  chase.  The  high  places  of  Roman  society  had  seen  no 
such  universal  talents  since  those  of  the  incomparable  Julius, 
and  Hadrian  might  rival,  moreover,  the  son  of  Venus  him- 
self in  the  majestic  beauty  of  his  person,  and  the  gracefulness 
of  his  manners.  We  know,  unfortunately,  too  little  of  his 
real  character  to  judge  of  the  points  in  which  his  inferiority 
actually  consisted,  and  why  it  is  that  the  first  of  the  Caesars 
so  naturally  takes  his  place  in  the  highest  rank  of  genius, 
while  the  cleverest  of  his  successors  is  hardly  set  above  the 
second ; but  this,  at  least,  we  may  observe,  that  the  mere 
acquisition  of  manifold  knowledge  was  far  easier  in  the  time 
of  Hadrian  than  at  the  earlier  epoch,  and  that  in  a generation 
of  intellectual  dwarfs,  a moderate  stature  might  command 
extravagant  admiration.  Yet  it  may  fairly  be  concluded 
that  the  first  man  of  one  age  would  probably  have  made 
himself  first  in  any  other,  and  the  rivalry  of  a Cicero,  a 

the  office  of  “ decemvir  litibus  dijudicandis.”  Casaubon  thinks  it  refers  to 
Italica,  the  home  of  his  family,  and  gravely  asks,  “ an  quia  Rom®  natus  qui- 
dem  Hadrianus  sed  Italic®  conceptus  ? ” If  Hadrian  so  returned  to  Rome  in 
his  fifteenth  year,  he  must  have  been  educated  elsewhere,  and  therefore,  as  we 
may  conclude,  in  Greece. 

1 Victor,  Epit,  28. : “ proxime  Polycletos  et  Euphranoras.”  In  the  text  i 
have  extracted  only  a specimen  of  the  long  list  of  excellences  enumerated  bj 
the  writer. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


325 


Varro,  and  a Sulpicius  might  have  elevated  Hadrian  to  the 
acknowledged  preeminence  of  Julius  himself. 

But  scholastic  training  and  academic  acquirements,  un- 
accompanied by  active  life,  might  have  placed  a pedant,  a 
second  Claudius,  on  the  throne.  For  such  a He  rises,  unde? 
completion  of  the  imperial  character  the  times  Sagefuftho 
afforded  Hadrian  the  widest  scope.  From  his  consulship, 
early  studies  he  was  summoned  to  a civil  office  in  Rome, 
under  the  eye  of  influential  patrons,  and  with  the  fairest 
prospect  of  advancement.  His  industry  did  justice  to  his 
abilities,  and  both  to  his  opportunities.  Meanwhile  his  guar- 
dian Trajan  was  placed  in  high  command  on  the  frontiers, 
and  Hadrian,  attached  perhaps  to  his  staff  or  cohorts,  served 
in  Upper  Germany,  and  attained  the  rank  of  tribune  in  the 
army  of  Pannonia.1  At  this  period,  that  is,  towards  the  end 
of  Domitian’s  reign,  while  the  rise  even  of  his  patron  was 
beyond  the  reach  of  conjecture,  he  was  confirmed  by  a sooth- 
sayer in  the  presage  of  a lofty  destiny,  which  had  been 
already  discovered  for  him  at  his  birth.2  The  path  of  fortune 
speedily  opened  to  him.  When  Trajan  was  adopted  by 
ISTerva  at  Rome,  the  army  on  the  Danube  deputed  Hadrian 

1 Hadrian  was  a tribune  of  the  Second  Legio  Adjutrix,  which,  as  Dion  in- 
forms us,  was  stationed  in  Lower  Pannonia,  and  transferred  in  the  latter  years 
of  Domitian  to  Lower  Mresia.  Dion,  lxv.  24. ; Spartian,  Hadr.  2.  This  legion 
had  been  levied  by  Yespasian,  together  with  the  Fourth  Flavia  and  the  Six- 
teenth Flavia  Firma.  Dion,  1.  c. ; Tac.  Hist.  iv.  68.  See  Marquardt  (Becker’s 
Allerthumer , iii.  2.  p.  866.).  These  levies  were  employed  to  repress  the  in- 
roads of  the  Sarmatians  and  the  menaces  of  the  Parthians. 

2 According  to  the  story  repeated  by  Spartianus,  he  consulted  the  “ Sortes 
Firgilianse,”  and  opened  the  mystic  volume  on  the  lines — 

“ Quis  procul  ille  autem  ramis  insignis  olivas 
Sacra  ferens  ? nosco  crines  incanaque  menta 
Regis  Romani.” 

The  olive  typified  the  Athenian  accomplishments  of  Hadrian ; the  beard,  not 
usually  worn  at  this  time  by  the  Romans,  was  an  appendage  brought  also  from 
Greece.  Ammianus  Marcellinus  (xxii.  12.)  repeats  a strange  legend  that  Ha- 
drian caused  the  mouth  of  the  Delphic  cavern  to  be  closed  with  large  stones, 
that  none  after  him  might  derive  from  the  oracle  the  expectation  of  empire. 


i‘26 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


to  convey  their  congratulations  to  the  new  Imperator  at  his 
quarters  on  the  Rhine.  The  young  man  was  eager  to  exe- 
cute so  agreeable  a mission ; but  his  brother-in-law  Servianus, 
who,  it  seems,  had  already  spitefully  divulged  his  excesses 
and  debts  to  1 tis  guardian,  tried  hard  to  detain  him,  and 
would  have  frustrated  it  by  getting  his  chariot  to  he  broken 
on  the  way.  But  Hadrian  was  not  to  be  thus  baffled.  Leav- 
ing his  disabled  vehicle  on  the  road,  and  continuing  his 
journey  on  foot  without  a moment’s  delay,  till  he  could 
obtain  the  means  of  more  expeditious  travelling,  he  succeeded 
in  outstripping  the  courier  sent  by  Servianus  to  anticipate 
him.1  Trajan  received  him  cordially,  employed  and  trusted 
him.  But  he  was  still  more  distinguished  by  the  favour  of 
Plotina,  which  secured  him  Sabina,  the  daughter  of  Matidia, 
in  marriage  ; though  Trajan  himself,  it  was  said,  was  indis- 
posed to  the  match,  which  might  seem  to  savour  too  much 
of  a political  adoption.  From  this  time,  however,  Hadrian’s 
advancement  became,  as  might  be  expected,  more  rapid. 
a. d.  loi.  Trajan,  now  sole  emperor,  and  in  his  fourth 
a.u.  854.  consulship,  appointed  him  qugestor,  in  which 
capacity  he  recited  the  prince’s  messages  to  the  senate,  and 
is  said  to  have  betrayed  but  an  imperfect  command  of  the 
Roman  accent,  which  he  had  lost  by  almost  constant  ab- 
sence from  the  city  since  his  childhood.  In  the  same  year 
he  attended  the  emperor  in  the  first  Dacian  expedition,  and 
he  was  wont  to  excuse  his  indulgence  in  wine  during  his 
sojourn  in  the  camp  by  pretending  that  he  was  required  to 
follow  his  general’s  example.  After  attaining  the  dignity, 
now  merely  nominal,  of  Tribune  of  the  Plebs,  he  was  en- 
trusted in  the  second  Dacian  war  with  the  command  of  the 
First  Minervian  legion,  and  his  services  were  acknowledged 
oy  the  present  of  a diamond  ring,  which  Trajan  had  himself 
received  from  Nerva.  This  he  complacently  regarded  as  a 
pledge,  or  at  least  an  augury  of  the  imperial  succession. 
The  sedileship  he  was  allowed  to  waive  on  account  of  his 


Spartian,  Hadr.  1.  c. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


327 


military  employments  ; but  be  succeeded  in  due  course  to 
the  prsetorship,  again  repaired  to  the  provinces,  and  as  gov- 
ernor of  Lower  Pannonia  checked  an  inroad  of  the  Sarmatians. 
The  strictness  of  his  discipline,  and  the  firmness  of  his  civil 
administration  here,  recommended  him  for  the  last  and  high- 
est dignity  a subject  could  attain,  and  during  Trajan’s  resi- 
dence in  Rome  he  was  appointed  consul  suffect.  To  the 
emperor  and  his  consort  he  continued  constantly  to  attach 
himself ; he  took  part  in  Trajan’s  expedition  into  the  East, 
and  through  the  interest  of  Plotina  received  the  prefecture 
of  Syria.  He  was  finally  appointed  consul  a A D m 
second  time,  but  again  suffect,  in  the  year  117.  A- v-  870- 
This  appointment  did  not  require  his  presence  in  Rome,  and 
he  was  resident  at  Antioch  as  the  seat  of  his  government  at. 
the  moment  of  his  patron’s  decease.1 

Such  were  the  steps  in  the  career  of  honours  accomplished 
by  this  fortunate  aspirant ; and  it  is  interesting  to  remark 
how  nearly  they  correspond  with  the  march  of  Hadrian  popu- 
a Lucullus  or  a Cicero  in  the  free  state.  So  ^u/heiFto 
faithfully  did  the  outward  form  of  the  Roman  the  emPire- 
government  in  the  ninth  century,  after  a hundred  and  sixty 
years  of  monarchy,  retain  the  impress  of  the  days  of  the 
republic.2  In  one,  however,  who  occupied  the  place  of  Ha- 
drian about  the  emperor,  this  succession  of  honours  was 
peculiarly  significant.  Sura,  Trajan’s  chief  adviser,  could 
distinctly  assure  him  that  he  was  destined  for  adoption,  and 
all  Rome  began  to  designate  him  as  heir  to  the  empire,  the 
nobles  vying  with  one  another  in  paying  court  to  him.  On 
Sura’s  death  he  found  himself  possessed  of  a still  larger  share 
of  his  prince’s  confidence,  which  was  frivolously  ascribed  by 
some  observers,  who  chose  to  overlook  the  natural  reasons 
for  it,  to  the  good  service  he  rendered  him  in  composing  his 

1 Spartian,  Jladr.  1.  c. 

a The  only  discrepancy  lay  in  the  innovation  of  the  suffect  consulship,  but 
outwardly  there  was  little  difference  in  Roman  eyes  between  the  honorary 
office  of  one  or  two  months  and  the  annual  magistracy.  The  spirit  of  the  two 
institutions  was  indeed  widely  at  variance. 


S28 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


speeches.  Still  more  maliciously  did  they  insinuate  that  he 
stood  too  high  in  the  favour  of  Plotina ; and  finally,  as  if 
still  unsatisfied,  they  did  not  scruple  to  pretend  that  he  won 
the  freedmen  of  the  palace  to  his  interests  by  the  basest  com- 
pliances.1 * So  feeble  was  the  character  of  the  Romans  at  this 
period;  such  the  petty  conceptions  they  now  commonly 
entertained  of  the  springs  of  human  conduct. 

Trajan  had  died  childless,  and  whatever  hopes  or  expec- 
tations might  have  been  formed  in  any  quarter,  he  had 
Rumours  about  adopted  110  heir,  nor  indicated  by  any  overt  act 
the  succession.  a successor  to  the  purple.  Sufficient  as  he  had 
felt  himself,  even  in  his  declining  years,  for  the  whole  weight 
of  the  empire,  he  had  placed  no  colleague  at  his  side  to  train 
him  for  independent  sovereignty.  About  the  future  succes- 
sion there  were  as  many  rumours  as  there  were  interests. 
The  senate  and  the  civilians  of  the  capital  leant  to  the  ex- 
pectation that  their  prince  intended  to  nominate  Neratius 
Prisons,  a learned  jurist  and  an  experienced  administrator. 
The  soldiers  whispered  the  name  of  Lusius  Quietus,  the 
most  distinguished  of  their  captains,  who  would  have  been 
as  acceptable  to  the  camps  as  Priscus  to  the  city.  But  Lu- 
sius, though  he  had  commanded  Roman  armies,  though  he 
had  been  raised  for  a month  to  the  consulship,  and  now  gov- 
erned a province,  was  neither  a citizen  nor  even  a provincial 
by  origin,  but  only  a Moorish  chieftain,  who  had  volunteered 
into  the  Roman  service  at  the  head  of  a band  of  mercenaries.3 
Such  an  adoption  would  have  been  an  outrage  on  the  senate, 
with  which  Trajan  had  acted  in  harmony  throughout  his 
reign,  and  to  which,  according  to  another  report,  he  proposed 
to  leave  the  free  choice  of  its  future  ruler.  Some,  indeed, 
surmised  that  as  he  sought  to  follow  the  great  Alexander  in 
his  military  career,  so  he  might  designedly  leave  the  empire 
as  the  prize  of  the  worthiest:  but  such  speculators  forgot  that 
while  the  senate  alone  claimed  the  legal  right  of  appoint- 

1 Spartian,  Hadr.  3.  4. : Dion,  lxix.  1. 

3 Little  weight  can  be  attached  to  the  intimation  of  Themistius  ( Oral . xri.) 

that  Trajan  designed  this  man  for  his  successor 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


329 


ment,  the  army  exercised  actual  power,  and  that  it  was 
perilous  to  leave  such  a prize  to  he  contended  for  by  such 
antagonists.  It  seems  more  likely  that  Trajan’s  genuine  re- 
spect for  his  council  made  him  hesitate ; and  his  anxiety, 
when  sensible  of  the  inroads  of  disease,  to  return  to  Rome, 
may  indicate  a wish  to  make  his  final  arrangements  in  con- 
cert with  it.  But  the  moment  of  nomination  had  been  too 
long  delayed.  In  the  last  hours  of  mortal  infirmity  the 
master  of  the  Roman  world  might  be  no  longer  master  of  him- 
self. He  might  become  the  sport  of  a favourite  or  a woman, 
of  his  kinsman  or  his  consort.  It  is  true  that  in  the  person 
of  Hadrian  almost  every  claim  was  united.  He  was  in  the 
vigour  of  his  age,  of  fine  personal  appearance,  admirably 
accomplished,  nor  untried  as  an  officer ; he  had  filled  the 
highest  civil  posts,  and  occupied  at  the  moment  the  most 
important  of  all  charges,  the  prefecture  of  Syria.  He  was 
doubly  connected  with  Trajan,  as  his  cousin  in  blood,  and 
his  niece’s  husband.  Yet  all  these  claims  might  have  pleaded 
in  vain  for  him  now,  as  hitherto,  but  for  the  favour  of  the 
empress,  who  felt  the  liveliest  concern  in  a question  which 
so  nearly  touched  her  own  position  and  interests.  From  the 
moment  that  Trajan  quitted  Antioch,  through  the  mournful 
stages  of  the  journey  to  Selinus,  she  had  not  ceased  to  inter- 
cede for  Hadrian’s  adoption.  Such  influence,  thus  exerted, 
under  whatever  motive,  might  easily  prevail.  There  seems 
no  reason  to  question  the  assertion  that  at 

. . . Alleged  adop- 

Plotina  s instigation  Iraian,  almost  m his  last  tion  of  Ha- 

i.T  drian  by  Trajan 

moments,  and  when  he  could  no  longer  hold  a on  bis  death- 
pen  (if  it  be  true  that  his  name  was  actually  sub- 
scribed by  her  hand  to  the  instrument),  addressed  to  the 
senate  a declaration  that  he  had  adopted  Hadrian,  subject 
only  to  its  gracious  confirmation.  The  day  of  the  emperor’s 
decease  is  not  accurately  known  ; it  was  imagined  that  the 
event  was  concealed  for  a brief  interval  to  favour  Plotina’s 
contrivance.  On  the  9th  of  August,  we  are  told,  Hadrian 
received  at  Antioch  the  intelligence  of  his  adoption.  Two 
days  later  his  parent’s  death  was  notified  to  him,  and  the 


330 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


legions,  to  which  he  immediately  addressed  himself,  accepted 
him  without  hesitation.  But  it  was  impossible  to  establish 
beyond  cavil  the  genuineness  of  this  sudden  adoption,  and 
Dion  could  cite  the  authority  of  his  own  father,  who  was  at 
a later  period  governor  of  Cilicia,  for  his  assertion  that  it 
was  wholly  fictitious.  According  to  a rumour  recorded  in 
the  fourth  century,  Trajan  had  already  ceased  to  breathe, 
when  Plotina  removed  the  body,  placed  a confidential  ser- 
vant on  the  couch,  drew  the  curtains  close,  and  summoned 
witnesses  into  the  chamber,  who  heard  a feeble  moan,  as  of 
their  dying  master,  declaring  that  he  adopted  as  his  son, 
and  nominated  as  his  successor,  his  trusty  and  well-beloved 
kinsman,  Publius  /Eiius  Hadrianus.1 

The  troops  at  Antioch  received  their  hero’s  last  com- 
mands with  respectful  acquiescence ; but  the  insecurity  which 
Hadrian  himself  felt  seems  to  be  marked  by  the 

Hadrian’s  sue-  . . . , . 

cession  con-  donative,  ot  twice  the  usual  amount,  with  which 

senate  and  the  he  hastened  to  gratify  them.2  But  if  Lusius  Qui- 
etus and  Martins  Turbo  had  higher  claims  on 
their  regard,  as  military  leaders,  these  men  were  absent  at 
the  moment  from  headquarters,  and  the  timely  liberality  of 
Plotina’s  favourite  carried  the  day  against  them.  Hadrian 
was  equally  politic,  and  not  less  supcessful  in  his  overtures 
to  the  senate.  To  that  body  he  professed  the  most  entire 
deference,  excusing  himself  for  having  yielded  to  the  precipi- 
tate greetings  of  the  soldiers,  whom  it  was  impossible,  he 

1 Dion,  Ixix.  1. ; Spartian,  IJadr.  4. ; Victor,  Cces.  13. 

2 Spartian,  Hadr.  5. : “ ob  auspicia  imperii.”  The  donative  to  the  soldiers 
was  originally  a gift  from  the  captured  booty  on  the  occasion  of  a triumph. 
Octavius,  after  the  battle  of  Mutina,  presented  each  of  his  soldiers  with  10,000 
H.  S.  or  about  80 1.  He  gave  other  sums,  sometimes  larger,  sometimes  smaller, 
on  different  occasions.  Caius  was  the  first  who  gave  a donative  on  his  acces- 
sion ; this  was  only  1000  H.  S.  or  8/.  per  man.  Claudius  and  Nero  followed  this 
example,  increasing  the  sum  to  15,000  H.  S. ; but  this  seems  to  have  been  con- 
fined to  the  praetorians.  From  this  time  the  custom  was  regularly  adopted,  but 
the  sum  given  is  not  generally  specified.  At  a later  period  Pertinax  gave 
12,000  H.  S.  and  Julianus  20,000  Marquardt  (Becker’s  Altcrihumer ),  iiL  2 
p.  439  note. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


331 


said,  to  leave  for  one  day  without  a legitimate  imperator. 
In  suing  for  a confirmation  of  the  late  prince’s  will,  and  of 
the  wishes  of  the  legions,  he  vowed  that  he  would  assume  no 
honours,  nor  suffer  them  to  he  decreed  him,  till  he  had  ap- 
plied for  them  in  person  in  acknowledgment  of  actual  ser- 
vices. Hitherto  it  had  been  customary  for  the  senate  to 
confer  immediately  on  the  new  emperor  all  the  functions  and 
titles  of  supreme  power.  But  at  intervals  only,  and  one  by 
one,  would  Hadrian  consent  to  accept  them,  and  the  title  of 
Pater  Patriae , the  highest  distinction  of  all,  he  refrained  from 
adopting  till  a much  later  period.  The  chiefs  of  the  civil 
administration  were  won  over  by  this  show  of  deference,  and 
became  ardent  supporters  of  a throne  which  was  at  first  man- 
ifestly unstable.  The  zeal  of  the  praetorian  prefects  whom 
Hadrian  appointed,  his  former  guardian  Attianus,  and  a man 
of  tried  and  noble  character  named  Similis,  sufficed  to  protect 
his  interests  during  his  absence  from  the  city,  and  he  was 
enabled  to  give  proof  of  his  clemency  at  the  commencement 
of  his  career  by  remitting  the  punishment  of  some  pretenders 
to  the  empire.1  Meanwhile  Matidia  bore  the  remains  of 
Trajan  in  a golden  urn  to  Rome,  where  they  were  received 
with  peculiar  distinction.  The  senate  admitted  Apotheosis  of 
their  friend  and  patron  to  the  honours  of  apoth-  Tra->an- 
eosis  without  hesitation,  and  his  successor  erected  a temple 
to  his  divinity  in  the  Ulpian  forum,  and  instituted  the  Par- 
thian games  in  his  honour.2 

Hadrian,  however,  had  no  intention  of  retaining  his  place 
permanently  at  the  head  of  his  armies.  His  most  anxious 
care  at  the  outset  of  his  reign  was  to  dispose  his  Hadrian  atan- 
officers  and  legions  in  the  manner  most  condu-  conanestsiiiS 
cive  to  his  own  security.  He  placed  Catilius  the  East- 
Severus,  a man  of  no  conspicuous  eminence,  in  the  prefecture 
of  Syria ; but  at  the  same  time  he  removed  Lusius  Quietus 
from  his  important  command  in  the  East,  and  sent  him  to 

1 Spartian,  Hadr.  6. : “ tantum  dementias  habuit,  ut  cum  sub  primis  imperii 
diebus  ab  Attiano  per  epistolas  esset  admonitus  ....  neminem  Itederet.” 

2 Spartian,  Hadr.  6. ; Euseb.  Chron. 


332 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


the  obscure  and  distant  government  of  Mauretania.  The 
control  of  Palestine  was  entrusted  to  Martius  Turbo.  The 
withdrawal  of  the  Roman  forces  from  the  regions  occupied 
by  Trajan  beyond  the  ancient  frontiers  was  a measure  of 
actual  necessity ; and  the  notion  that  the  abandonment  of 
these  recent  acquisitions  was  prompted  by  a mean  jealousy  of 
the  conqueror  may  be  discarded  as  wholly  groundless.  The 
conquests  of  Trajan  in  the  East  were  plainly  unsubstantial. 
There  was  no  soil  beyond  the  Euphrates  in  which  Roman  in- 
stitutions could  take  root,  while  the  expense  of  maintaining 
them  would  have  been  utterly  exhausting.  But  Hadrian 
was  also  sensible  of  the  danger  to  his  authority  from  the 
ambition  of  military  chiefs  placed  there  in  unlimited  com- 
mand of  men  and  money,  and  removed  by  the  enormous 
distance  from  effectual  supervision  and  control.  On  all  these 
grounds  there  can  be  no  doubt  of  his  discretion  in  recurring, 
at  least  in  this  quarter,  to  the  deliberate  policy  of  Augustus, 
and  confining  the  possessions  of  the  empire  within  their  nat- 
He  repairs  to  nra^  or  traditional  limits.1 2  The  execution  of 
reiebrates^Tra-  these  arrangements  may  have  occupied  the 
jan’s  triumph,  remainder  of  the  year  117.  On  their  completion 
Hadrian  removed  from  Antioch,  and  repaired  to  Rome.  The 
senate  received  him  with  acclamations,  and  enjoined  him  to 
celebrate  as  his  own  the  victory  of  Trajan  over  the  Par- 
thians ; but  this  distinction  he  modestly  declined,  and  the 
image  of  the  great  conqueror  was  borne  in  triumph  to  the 
temple  of  Jupiter.  So  far  did  he  carry  his  moderation,  as  to 
remit  to  Italy  entirely,  and  in  part  to  the  provinces  also,  the 
gift  of  coronary  gold , usually  presented  to  an  emperor  on  the 
occasion  of  his  triumph.'  Hadrian  had  come  indeed  to  Rome 

1 Spartian,  Hadr.  5.  The  provinces  abandoned  by  Hadrian  were  Armenia, 
Mesopotamia,  and  Assyria.  He  still  retained  the  district  of  Petra,  to  which 
Trajan  had  given  the  name  of  Arabia. 

2 A.  Gellius,  v.  6.,  explains,  as  an  antiquary,  the  meaning  of  the  “ aurum 
soronarium.”  At  first  a crown,  i.  e.,  wreaths  or  chaplets  of  laurel,  were  pre- 
sented. This  simple  offering  was  afterwards  exchanged  for  similar  crowns  in 
pure  gold.  Finally  the  crowns  were  commuted  for  a sum  of  money.  The  gift 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


333 


laden  with  the  spoils  of  war,  and  the  large  sums  at  his  dis- 
posal enabled  him  to  extend  his  liberality  with  well-cal- 
culated profusion.  Throughout  the  provinces  administered 
by  imperial  prefects  he  remitted  the  arrears  of  taxes  to  the 
amount  of  seven  millions  of  our  money,  and  ostentatiously 
burnt  the  records  of  the  debt  in  the  Ulpian  forum.1  At  the 
game  time  he  relieved  the  local  officers  from  the  burden  of 
maintaining  the  imperial  posts,  and  laid  the  charge  of  this 
important  department  on  the  fiscus.2  To  these  acts  of  mu- 
nificence was  added  the  dotation  of  noble  but  impoverished 
families,  and  numerous  were  the  well-born  Romans,  both 
male  and  female,  who  were  enabled  by  this  bounty  to  main- 
tain the  dignity  of  office,  or  the  decent  comfort  befitting 
their  station.  The  alimentation  of  poor  children, 

. . . . Alimentation 

winch  we  have  noticed  m preceding  reigns,  was  of  poor  cMi- 
extended  or  increased  by  fresh  endowments.  At 
a later  period  the  authority  of  Hadrian  was  cited  for  the 
definition  of  eighteen  years  in  males  and  fourteen  in  females, 
as  the  age  to  which  this  liberality  should  be  extended.3 

was  originally  a thank-offering  from  the  conquered  and  spared.  On  the  line 
of  Virgil,  “ Dona  recognoscit  populorum,”  Servius  remarks  that  this  alludes  to 
the  “ aurum  coronarium.”  See  more  on  the  subject  in  Becker’s  AUerthitmer , 

iii.  2.  211. 

1 This  statement  is  founded  on  a comparison  of  passages  in  Dion,  lxix.  8. : 
Spartian,  Hadr.  '7.,  an  inscription  in  Grater’s  Thesaurus,  and  other  collections, 
and  a coin  described  by  Spanheim,  Eckhel,  and  others.  There  are  certain  diffi- 
culties connected  with  it  as  regards  the  time  and  the  circumstances,  which  are 
carefully  discussed  by  Gregorovius,  Gesch.  Hadrians , p.  IT,  foil.  The  sum  re- 
mitted is  stated  in  Roman  money  at  “ novies  millies  centena  millia  N.”  The 
arrears  were  for  a period  of  sixteen  years,  and  the  date  of  the  transaction  was 
the  second  consulship  of  Hadrian,  a.  d.  118. 

2 It  must  be  understood,  however,  that  at  this  period  there  was  no  clear 
distinction  between  the  Fiscus  and  the  -<Erarium.  The  emperor  had  full  com- 
mand over  the  treasury  of  the  senatorial  provinces,  as  he  had  over  the  ap- 
pointment of  their  officers.  Dion,  liii.  16.  22. ; Hegewisch,  Rcem.  Hinanzeii, 
p.  183. 

3 Spartian,  Hadrian.  T. : “ pueris  ac  puellis,  qmbus  etiam  Trajanus  alimenta 
detulerat,  incrementum  liberalitatis  adjecit.”  From  a notice  in  the  Digest^ 
xxxiv.  1.  14.,  it  would  seem  that  this  increment  was  an  extension  of  the  age  of 


334 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


Throughout  the  reign  of  Hadrian  the  series  of  events 
must  he  arranged,  in  a great  degree,  from  conjecture.  We 

The  dates  of  may  suPPose  that  he  was  detained  for  some 
this  reign  un-  months  at  least  in  the  East  after  the  death  of 

certain.  . 

Irajan,  and  that  his  progress  towards  Italy, 
when  he  at  last  set  out,  was  retarded  hy  the  arrangements 
which  it  was  requisite  to  make  in  the  provinces  through 
which  he  journeyed.  If  he  reached  Rome  about  the  begin- 
ning of  the  year  118,  his  first  residence  in  the  city  could  not 
have  been  prolonged  beyond  a few  months,  and  a career  of 
liberality  on  which  he  entered  was  interrupted  by  the  cam- 
paign which  he  found  it  necessary  to  undertake  in  person  in 
the  ensuing  spring.  The  moment  of  his  accession,  as  we 
have  seen,  was  clouded  with  public  anxiety.  Besides  the 
disturbances  in  the  East,  the  peace  of  the  empire  seems  to 
have  been  harassed  by  obscure  outbreaks  in 
Mauretania : the  Caledonians  in  the  north  of 
Britain  were  assailing  the  outposts  of  the  Roman 
power  in  that  distant  island,  and  in  another 
quarter,  equally  remote  from  the  Atlas  and  the  Oheviotes, 
from  the  Rile  and  the  Euphrates,  the  wild  Sarmatian  horse- 
men were  threatening  to  swim  the  frontier  streams  of  Dacia 


Danger  on  the 
frontiers  of 
Mauretania, 
Britain,  and 
Dacia. 


and  Mgesia.  The  conquest  of  Trajan  beyond  the  Danube, 
fortified,  garrisoned  and  colonized,  offered  an  important  bul- 
wark against  the  rising  tides  of  nomadic  barbarism  ever 
beating  on  the  outworks  of  Roman  civilization.  Thrust  forth 
into  the  heart  of  Europe,  between  Sarmatians  on  the  east  and 
Sarmatians  on  the  west,  the  province  of  Dacia  required  to  be 
strongly  supported  and  firmly  attached  to  the  body  of  the 
empire  against  which  it  leaned.  The  genius,  indeed,  of  the 
Dacians  seems  to  have  been  peculiarly  favourable  to  this 


the  recipients  : “ ut  pueri  ad  xviii.,  puellas  ad  xiv.  annum  alantur.”  It  was  af- 
firmed by  Hadrian’s  detractors  that  for  all  his  measures  which  he  feared  would 
be  unpopular,  he  pretended  to  have  express  directions  from  Trajan ; among 
these  were  the  abandonment  of  the  eastern  provinces,  and  the  demolition,  as  it 
would  seem,  of  the  theatre  which  Trajan  had  himself  commenced  in  the  Camp 
us  Martius.  Spartian,  Hadrian.  9. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


335 


alliance ; for  nowhere,  as  has  been  said,  did  the  ideas  and 
language  of  the  conquerors  strike  root  more  rapidly  or  fix 
themselves  more  permanently.  Roman  citizens  had  already 
poured  into  the  fertile  plains  of  Hungary  and  Transylvania, 
and  not  only  a multitude  of  Roman  lives,  hut  masses  of  Ro- 
man wealth  and  manifold  interests,  were  protected  by  the 
constant  presence  of  a large  military  force.  But  even  Trajan 
had  not  disdained  the  precaution,  before  adopted  by  Domitian 
and  Yespasian,  of  purchasing  peace  from  the  barbarians  by 
gifts  and  subsidies.  It  had  already  become  a practice  on  the 
frontiers  to  keep  some  of  the  neighbouring  chiefs  in  pay,  in 
order  to  restrain  their  hostility  to  Rome,  and  foster  their 
mutual  jealousies.  The  aggressions  of  the  Rox-  Aggressions  of 
olani  on  the  Pruth  or  Dniester  were  caused,  it  the  Eoxolanl- 
seems,  by  a reduction  of  the  tribute  which  they  had  hitherto 
received.1  Swarms  of  horsemen  crossed  the  rivers  and  swept 
over  the  plains,  and  though  they  could  not  stand  the  charge 
of  the  Roman  soldiery,  nor  make  dispositions  for  the  perma- 
nent occupation  of  Roman  territory,  they  spread  terror  and 
confusion  among  the  defenceless  inhabitants,  and  plundered 
their  homesteads  with  impunity.  The  alarm  reached  Rome 
itself,  and  Hadrian  paused  in  the  midst  of  his  ad- 
ministrative  measures  to  put  himself  at  the  head  the  field 
of  his  forces,  and  prepare  to  take  the  field.  Large 
masses  of  troops  were  directed  to  the  Msesian  frontier,  and 
Rome  saw  once  more  her  prince  go  forth  to  distant  warfare, 
the  toils  and  perils  of  which  were  magnified  by  distance  and 
obscurity.  His  back  was  no  sooner  turned  than  jealousies 
rankling  against  him  broke  out  in  a formidable  conspiracy. 
When  Hadrian  commenced  his  career  at  Rome  with  such 
ostentatious  generosity,  he  was  anxious  to  disarm  the  foes 
disguised  but  not  unknown,  who  clustered  around  him.  Lu 
sins  Quietus,  Cornelius  Palma,  Nigrinus  and  Celsus,  the 
chiefs  of  the  army  or  the  senate,  all  felt  equally  mortified  by 


1 Spartian,  Hadr.  6. : “ cum  rege  Roxolanorum,  qui  de  imminutis  stipendih 
querebatur,  cognito  negotio  pacem  composuit.”  ' 


338 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


the  elevation  to  which  their  former  comrade  had  attained, 
which  they  ascribed  neither  to  his  merits,  nor  his  connexion 
with  their  old  master,  but  to  a paltry  intrigue.  Our  record 
of  the  affair  is  indeed  confused  and  inconsistent.  One  ac- 
count stated  that  it  was  plotted  to  cut  off  the  emperor  in 
hunting;  another  that  Nigrinus  purposed  to  kill  him  while 
. sacrificing.  The  assassination  was  to  be  ef- 
againsthim  fccted  during  his  absence  from  Italy;  but  it 

suppressed.  . T . 

was  m Italy  that  the  reported  conspirators  were 
seized,  at  four  different  spots ; they  were  condemned  and 
put  to  death  by  direction  of  the  senate,  and  Hadrian,  who 
had  given  the  now  customary  promise  never  to  exact  the 
blood  of  a senator,  could  declare  that  their  execution  was 
without  his  orders,  and  against  his  wish.1  But  whatever 
were  the  actual  circumstances  of  this  event,  we  may  conjec- 
ture that  Hadrian’s  return  was  accelerated  by  it.  Instead 
of  plunging  at  the  head  of  his  troops  into  a career  of  fresh 
conquests,  as  his  subjects  may  have  anticipated,  he  refrained 
even  from  chastising  the  insults  of  the  enemy,  and  was  satis- 
fied with  repeating  and  perhaps  increasing  the  bribes  of  his 
predecessors.2  The  Roxolani  were  induced  to 

The  Roxolani  1 . . 

induced  to  re-  retire  once  more  within  their  OAvn  lines,  only  to 
break  out  again  at  the  next  favourable  opportu- 
nity. But  Hadrian  secured  the  tranquillity  of  Dacia,  at  least 
for  a season,  by  placing  in  command  there  his  trustiest  officer, 
Martius  Turbo,  with  extraordinary  powers.  The  province 
continued  to  be  held  as  an  integral  portion  of  the  empire 
through  many  reigns,  and  we  are  at  a loss  to  account  for  the 
Hadrian’s  ai-  common  statement  of  the  historians,  that  Ha- 
o/abandoning11  ^ri:m  contemplated  its  abandonment,  not  so  much 
Dacia.  from  the  difficulty  of  keeping  it,  as  from  a petty 


1 Spartian,  Hadr.  7.  This  conspiracy  may  be  dated  a.  d.  119,  in  Hadrian’s 
third  consulship.  Euseb.  Chron. 

2 Spartian,  &c.  Hadr.  6.  The  Roxolani  lay  to  the  east  of  Dacia ; the  Sar- 
matians  are  mentioned  both  to  the  east  and  to  the  west.  The  Iazyges  (on  the 
Theiss),  who  wanted  to  trade  with  the  Roxolani,  sought  a passage  through  Da- 
cia. Dion,  lxsj.  19.  It  is  said  of  the  emperor  Aurelius : t<pf/nev  avrolg  ■xpoi, 
rovg  'PotjoXavovg  bid  rrjg  A atiag  eTifiiyvvodai. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


337 


jealousy  of  Trajan.1  Dion,  indeed,  declares  circumstantially 
that  he  destroyed  the  bridge  over  the  Danube,  to  prevent 
the  barbarians  from  crossing  into  Msesia;  and  Dion  had  un- 
doubtedly the  means  of  ascertaining  the  truth,  if  he  cared  to 
employ  them.  But  my  acquaintance  with  this  historian  does 
not  lead  me  to  balance  his  word  in  such  a case  against  the 
great  improbability  which  lies  on  the  face  of  the  story.2 

Hadrian  returned  to  Rome,  pleased  at  least  with  the  clear 
sweep  which  had  been  made  of  all  his  rivals,  and  well  satis- 
fied with  the  zeal  the  senate  had  shown  in  his  Hadrian  courts 
behalf ; yet  not  without  apprehension  of  the  the  senate> 
grudge  that  might  be  felt  against  him  for  the  shedding  of 
so  much  noble  blood.  The  removal  of  Attianus  and  Similis 
from  the  praetorian  prefecture  may  have  been  meant  to  mark 
his  pretended  displeasure  at  this  sacrifice.  Both  of  them 
were  trusty  and  able  servants.  The  simple  honesty  of 
Similis  was  deemed  worthy  of  special  remembrance  by  the 
historians.  Doubtless  the  sudden  disgrace  of  men  so  highly 
recommended  helped  to  stamp  on  Hadrian  a character  for 
ingratitude  and  envy.3  He  repeated  the  assurance  he  had 
already  given,  that  henceforth  the  life  of  a senator  should  be 
ever  sacred  in  his  eyes.  The  tokens  of  deference  he  showed 
to  the  order,  the  marked  favour  he  bestowred  on  its  most 
distinguished  members,  and  the  various  popular  deci*ees  he 
issued,  may  probably  be  traced  to  this  period,  and  to  the 
anxiety  he  felt  at  this  moment  to  conciliate  the  nobles  of  the 
city.  The  emperor , we  read,  deigned  to  admit  the  best  of  the 

1 Eutrop.  viii.  6 : “ qui  Trajani  glorise  invidens  statim  provincias  tres  reli- 
quit  quas  Trajanus  addiderat  (see  above) ; . . . . idem  de  Dacia  facere  cona- 
tum  amici  deterraerunt.” 

2 Dion,  lxviii.  13. : a^u\e  rrjv  ’mmoXfiQ  KaracKevijv.  But  this  is  not  con- 
firmed by  Eutropius,  from  whom  we  may  infer  that  Hadrian  was  deterred  from 
abandoning  the  province  by  the  claims  of  the  Roman  settlers  on  his  protec- 
tion; viii.  6.  An  inscription,  said  to  have  been  discovered  at  Yarhely,  goes  so 
far  as  to  ascribe  the  conquest  of  the  province  to  Hadrian.  “ Imp.  . . . Ha- 
driano  ....  cujus  virtute  Dacia  imperio  addita  felix  est.”  Gruter,  249.  ; 
Gregorovius,  p.  22.  Eckhel  seems  to  doubt  its  genuineness,  vi.  494. 

s Spartian,  Hadrian.  9.  Dion,  lxix.  19. 

130  vot.  vii. — 


838 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


senators  freely  to  his  private  society.  lie  repudiated  the 
games  of  the  circus  voted  in  his  honour , excepting  those  on 
his  own  birthday  only , and  often  declared  in  the  Curia  that 
he  would  so  govern  the  commonwealth  that  it  should  Jcnow 
that  it  belonged  to  the  people , and  not  to  himself  As  he 
made  himself  consul  thrice , so  he  advanced  several  person - 
ages  to  a third  consulship ; but  the  number  to  whom  he 
granted  a second  was  very  considerable.  His  own  third  con • 
sulship  he  held  for  four  months  only , and  in  that  time  sate 
often  in  judgment.  He  always  attended  the  regular  meetings 
of  the  senate  whether  within  or  ivithout  the  city.  He  cher- 
ished highly  the  dignity  of  the  order , making  new  members 
with  difficulty ; so  much  so,  that  when  he  thus  advanced  At- 
tianus , who  was  already  prefect  of  the  praetorians,  and  enjoy- 
ed the  triumphal  ornaments , he  showed  that  there  was  no 
higher  eminence  to  which  he  could  exalt  him.  He  suffered 
not  the  knights  to  try  the  causes  of  senators , unless  he  were 
himself  present ; no,  nor  even  then.  For  it  had  been  the  cus- 
tom for  the  prince  to  take  counsel  with  both  senators  and 
knights  in  such  cases,  and  to  deliver  judgment  after  deliber- 
ating with  them  all  in  common.  Finally,  Hadrian  expressed 
his  detestation  of  princes  who  paid  the  senate  less  deference 
than  he  showed  himself  To  Servianus,  his  sister's  husband, 
whom  he  treated  with  such  reverence  as  always  to  meet  him 
when  he  issued  from  his  chamber  in  the  morning,  he  gave 
a third  consulship,  unasked , taking  care  that  it  should  not 
coincide  with  his  own,  that  Servianus  might  never  be  required 
and  the  popu-  fj0  sPea^c  second  in  debate } This  respect  for  the 
lace-  security  and  dignity  of  the  Roman  magnates  was 

confirmed,  as  far  as  laws  could  confirm  it,  by  a decree  that 
the  estates  of  criminals  should  no  longer  accrue  to  the  im- 
perial fiscus,  but  to  the  public  treasury.  Hadrian  thus  wise- 
ly put  himself  beyond  the  reach  of  temptation,  beyond  the 
suspicion  of  interest.  The  affluence  he  inherited  from  his 
father’s  conquests  he  maintained  by  his  own  discreet  econo 


1 Spartian,  Hadr.  8. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


339 


my ; for  his  expenditure,  though  ample  and  liberal  as  be- 
came him,  seems  to  have  been  extravagant  in  no  particular ; 
even  his  buildings,  however  splendid  and  costly,  were  less 
various  and  less  numerous  than  those  of  Trajan.  On  great 
occasions  the  shows  with  which  he  favoured  the  populace 
were  conceived  on  a scale  of  unbounded  magnificence.  It  is 
remarked  that  he  exhibited  combats  of  gladiators  for  six  days 
in  succession,  and  gave  a birthday  massacre  of  a thousand 
wild  beasts ; but  such  banquets  of  blood  and  treasure  were 
apparently  not  repeated,  and  on  the  whole  the  attitude  he 
assumed  towards  the  people  at  their  amusements  was  stern 
and  reserved,  rather  than  criminally  indulgent.1 

Such  were  the  arts,  easy  to  princes,  by  which  Hadrian  laid 
the  basis  of  his  power  in  the  regard  of  the  soldiers,  the  no- 
bles, and  the  great  body  of  the  people.  Succeed-  Hadrian’s  pop- 
ing to  the  most  beloved  of  rulers,  with  an  obe-  ular  manners, 
dient  army,  a contented  nobility,  and  a well-stored  treasury, 
his  position  was  doubtless  more  than  usually  favourable. 
Nevertheless  the  temper  and  abilities  he  brought  to  the  task 
were  also  admirably  fitted  for  it.  We  may  remark  how  lit- 
tle the  consolidation  of  the  monarchy  had  yet  tended  to 
separate  the  master  from  his  subjects,  and  fix  barriers 
of  etiquette  between  them.  The  intercourse  of  Trajan  with 
his  friend  Pliny,  though  disfigured  by  the  extravagant  forms 
of  salutation  adopted  by  the  inferior,  was  substantially  that 
of  two  companions  in  arts  and  arms  in  the  time  of  the  repub- 
lic ; it  was  less  distant  perhaps  than  that  which  had  obtained 
between  the  proconsul  in  his  province  and  the  favoured  sub- 
altern of  his  cohort.  But  Hadrian  was  distin- 


guished, even  beyond  his  predecessor,  by  the  casionai  jeai°- 
...  „ , . „ i • 1 1 t ousy  and  envy. 

geniality  ot  his  temperament.  V ersed  in  all  the 
knowledge  of  his  era,  he  placed  himself  on  an  intimate  foot- 
ing with  the  ablest  teachers  and  practitioners,  and  divided 


1 Spartian,  in  Hadrian.  '7,  8.  The  birthday  here  specified  was  probably 
that  which  fell  in  the  year  119,  after  Hadrian’s  return  from  Msesia.  The  anni- 
versary  was  the  4th  of  January,  when  he  had  just  accepted  his  third  consul- 
ship. 


S40 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


his  smiles  equally  between  senators  like  Front  o,  and  freed 
men  such  as  Favorinus  the  rhetorician,  and  the  architect 
Apollodorus.  He  condescended,  indeed,  to  enter  into  compe- 
tition with  the  professors  of  eloquence  and  the  fine  arts  ; but 
here,  though  he  did  not  require,  like  Hero,  that  his  rivals 
should  yield  him  the  palm,  he  could  not  always  control  the 
irritability  of  his  genius.  It  was  well  for  those  who  could 
allow  themselves  to  be  worsted,  and  disguise  at  the  same 
time  the  tameness  of  their  surrender,  as  in  the  case  of  Favor- 
inus, who,  according  to  the  well-known  story,  yielded  a 
strong  position  to  his  imperial  antagonist,  and  replied  to  the 
inquiry  of  a surprised  bystander,  why  he  defended  himself  so 
feebly , that  it  is  ill  arguing  with  the  master  of  thirty  legions .’ 
Other  opponents,  however,  were  less  obliging.  Hadrian,  it  is 
said,  continued  after  his  accession  to  retain  a grudge  against 
Apollodorus  for  having  derided  his  early  efforts  in  painting. 
He  was  bent  on  proving  himself  a greater  architect  than  the 
master  of  the  art.  When  about  to  construct  his  magnificent 
temple  of  Rome  and  Yenus,  he  produced  a design  of  his  own, 
and  showed  it  with  proud  satisfaction  to  Apollodorus.  The 
creator  of  the  Trajan  column  remarked  with  a sneer  that  the 
deities,  if  they  rose  from  their  seats,  must  thrust  their  heads 
through  the  ceiling.  The  emperor,  we  are  assured,  could  not 
forgive  this  banter,  which  was  at  least  unbecoming ; but  we 
need  hardly  take  to  the  letter  the  statement  that  he  put  his 
critic  to  death  for  it.2  Towards  the  close  of  his  career,  in- 
deed, Hadrian  became,  as  we  shall  see,  captious  and  jealous 
of  those  around  him ; but  such  cold-blooded  barbarity  is  lit- 
tle in  accordance  with  his  usual  temper.  To  his  many  ac- 

1 Spartian,  Hadr.  15.  This  phlegmatic  philosopher  used  to  pique  himself 
on  three  paradoxes  of  fortune:  Taharrjgtov  'EA/lyrtfetr,  evvovx°C  £)V  poixeiag 
Kpiveadai , ftaaiku  SiaQlprcQai  iial  Philostr.  Vit.  Sophist,  i.  8.  For  other 
anecdotes  of  the  same  kind  about  Hadrian  see  this  writer  also,  Vit.  Sophist. 

t.  22. 

s Dion,  Ixix.  4. : k at  olre  tt/v  opyrjv  oire  ryv  Utt7jv  k&tscixev,  aXti  i<j>6vev- 
cev  aiiriv.  The  reader  who  has  attended  to  the  character  of  this  writer's 
statements  throughout  this  history  will  be  always  ready  to  allow  for  his  malig> 
nant  credulity. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


341 


complishments  lie  added,  on  the  whole,  an  affability  rarely 
Been  in  the  Roman  princes,  such  as  may  remind  us  of  the  best 
days  of  the  republic,  when  the  demeanour  of  the  noble 
toward  his  client  was  marked  with  peculiar  courtesy  and 
forbearance,  secured  by  the  general  sobriety  of  his  manners 
and  the  refined  dignity  of  his  breeding. 

Hadrian’s  third  consulship  commenced  with  the  year  119, 
and  he  retained  it  for  four  months,  in  which  interval  he  re- 
turned from  his  Sarmatian  expedition,  amused 

L 7 Hadrian  under- 

and  flattered  the  senators  in  the  city,  and  pre-  takes  to  mate 

^ x . himself  per- 

pared  for  more  extended  movements.  From  this  sonaiiyac- 

1 quainted  with 

period  the  only  history  of  this  emperor,  and  ot  ail  the  proy- 
his  times,  is  the  record,  confused  and  imperfect 
both  in  dates  and  circumstances,  of  his  journeys  through 
every  province  of  his  empire,  broken  only  by  occasional  so- 
journs at  his  provincial  capitals,  till  he  finally  settled  for  his 
last  few  years  at  Rome.  It  was  his  object,  partly  from 
policy,  but  more  perhaps  from  the  restless  curiosity  of  his 
disposition,  to  inspect  every  corner  of  his  dominions,  to  ex- 
amine in  person  its  state  and  resources,  to  make  himself 
acquainted  with  its  wants  and  capabilities,  and  with  the  ad- 
ministrative processes  applied  to  it.  Curious  also  about  the 
character  of  men,  he  studied  on  the  spot  the  temper,  the 
abilities,  the  views  and  feelings  of  the  multitude  of  officials 
with  whom  he  had  ordinarily  to  correspond  at  a distance, 
upon  whom  he  had  to  impress  his  own  views  of  government, 
to  whom  he  had  to  declare  his  pleasure  by  the  rescripts  which 
became  thenceforth  the  laws  of  the  empire.  There  is  some- 
thing sublime  in  the  magnitude  of  the  task  he  thus  imposed 
on  himself ; nor  are  the  zeal  and  constancy  with  which  he 
pursued  it  less  extraordinary.  If  other  chiefs  of  wide-spread 
empires  have  begun  with  the  same  bold  and  generous  concep- 
tion of  their  duty,  it  may  be  doubted  whether  any  have  so 
persevered  through  a period  of  twenty  years. 

It  may  be  observed,  moreover,  that  there  was  something 
in  the  carriage  required  of  a Roman  Imperator  little  consist- 


342 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


ent  ■with,  such  active  and  prying  curiosity.  The 

IIis  assiduity  . ... 

in  performing  dignity  of  his  military  character  was  hedged 

the  duties  of  a 0 J . J ” 

military  chief,  round  by  formahties  and  decorums,  on  which  the 

and  in  main-  . . 

taini  ig  disci-  haste  and.  excitement  ol  the  traveller  and  sight 

seer  would  rudely  infringe.  Tet  among  the 
merits  which  the  historians  recognise  in  Hadrian,  was  one 
which  they  could  have  learnt  only  from  his  officers  and 
soldiers,  his  assiduity  in  performing  the  duties  of  a com- 
mander. Hadrian,  it  was  allowed,  maintained  in  its  full 
vigour  the  discipline  of  Trajan.  He  was  constantly  seen, 
throughout  his  progresses,  at  the  head  of  his  legions,  some- 
times on  horseback,  hut  more  commonly  on  foot,  marching 
steadily  with  them  twenty  miles  a day,  and  always  bare- 
headed ; for  if  the  Roman  soldier  was  permitted  to  relieve 
himself  on  march  of  the  weight  of  his  helmet,  he  might  not 
replace  it  with  the  effeminate  covering  of  a cap  or  bonnet. 
He  inspected  day  by  day  the  camps  and  lines  of  his  garrisons, 
examined  their  arms  and  machines  of  war,  their  tents,  huts, 
and  hospitals,  as  well  as  their  clothes  and  rations,  tasting 
himself  their  black  bread,  their  lard  and  cheese,  their  sour 
wine  or  vinegar.  These  attentions  ingratiated  him  with  the 
soldiers,  and  made  them  tolerant  of  his  severe  demands  on 
their  patience  and  activity.  He  constantly  passed  his  troops 
in  review,  and  encouraged  them  by  his  own  example  to  sub- 
mit to  the  ever-recurring  drill  which  was  necessary  to  main- 
tain their  efficiency.  He  restored  or  enforced  the  regulations 
of  the  tacticians,  and,  while  he  sedulously  avoided  war  on  the 
frontiers,  kept  all  his  legions  in  a state  of  preparedness  for 
war.  With  this  view  he  strictly  repressed  the  indulgences 
both  of  men  and  officers,  in  respect  to  dwellings,  furniture, 
and  equipments,  and  cut  oft’  the  luxurious  appliances  with 
which  they  sought  to  relieve  the  hardships  or  tedium  of  their 
protracted  exile.  An  important  testimony  to  the  value  of 
his  exertions  is  borne  by  the  historian  Dion,  who,  writing  at 
least  eighty  years  later,  says  that  the  rules  established  by 
Hadrian  remained  in  force  down  to  his  own  days.’ 

1 Dion,  Ixix.  9.  Comp.  Spartian,  in  Hadrian.  10.  Yegetius,  a writer  ol 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


343 


Even  before  bis  elevation  to  power,  Hadrian’s  active 
career  had  led  him  into  most  of  the  provinces.  The  regions 
of  the  2\Torth-west  were  amono-  those  with  which 

° Hadrian  s pro- 

he  was  least  acquainted,  and  in  these  his  presence  gress  into  Gaul 

...  . . . and  Germany. 

was  more  especially  required  to  maintain  the 
authority  of  the  conquerors.  On  quitting  Rome  he  directed 
his  course  through  Gaul,  and  reached  the  Germanic  provinces 
on  the  Rhine,  where  he  showed  himself  to  the  barbarians 
from  the  ramparts  of  Moguntiacum  or  Colonia.  He  set  a 
Icing  over  the  Germans , says  Spartianus,  with  excessive  and 
indeed  culpable  brevity ; but  the  oracle  admits  neither  of 
expansion  nor  explanation.1  We  are  wholly  ignorant  of  the 
attitude  assumed  by  the  German  tribes  towards  Rome  at 
this  moment,  and  of  their  relations  to  one  another.  We  can 
only  suppose  that  the  chief  whom  Hadrian  established  on  his 
throne  was  pledged,  and  possibly  subsidized,  to  restrain  the 
nations  that  bordered  on  the  rampart  of  Trajan ; and  we 
may  believe  that,  not  trusting  entirely  to  this  safeguard,  the 
emperor  prolonged  or  strengthened  that  great  barrier.  His 
care,  indeed,  extended  to  the  whole  line  of  the  German  fron- 
tier. The  foundation  of  a colony  at  Juvaviutn,  or  Salzburg, 
which  received  the  name  of  Forum  Hadriani,  attests  the 
vigilance  which  directed  his  view  from  the  Rhine  to  the 
Salza,  and  the  taste,  I would  willingly  add,  which  selected 
for  a town  to  bear  his  name,  the  most  enchanting  site  in 
central  Europe. 

From  Gaul  Hadrian  passed  over  into  Britain.  Of  the 
movements  in  that  province  which  required  his  presence  we 
have  no  account ; but  since  Trajan’s  death  an 

. . Progress  into 

outbreak  oi  some  importance  had  occurred:  tor  Britain, 

. , , . .....  . a.d.119, 

in  tlie  cursory  allusion  to  it  which  alone  remains 

the  fourth  century,  says  (i.  27.) : “ prseterea  et  vetus  eonsuetudo  permansit,  et 
D.  Augusti  atque  Hadriani  constitutionibus  praecavetur,  ut  ter  in  mense  tam 
equites  quam  pedites  educantur  ambulatum.”  This  tension  of  discipline  seems 
to  be  commemorated  on  the  coins  of  Hadrian  which  bear  the  legend  disciplin. 
Aug.  Eekhel,  Doctr.  JVumm.  vi.  503.  Victor  remarks  more  generally : “ofii- 
cia  publica  et  palatina,  nec  non  militife,  in  earn  formam  statuit  quse  paucis  per 
Oonstantinum  immutatis  hodie  perseverant.”  Epit.  28. 

1 Spartian,  Iladr.  12.;  “ Germanis  regem  constituit.” 


344 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


the  losses  of  Rome  from  the  Britons  are  placed  in  the  same 
line  with  those  she  suffered  from  the  Jews.1 *  The  conquest 
of  the  southern  portion  of  the  island  had  been  effected,  as  we 
have  seen,  with  rapidity,  though  not  unchequered  by  reverses. 
Commenced  by  Plautius  and  Ostorius,  confirmed  by  Sue- 
tonius, and  consolidated  by  Agricola,  it  had  been  accepted 
from  henceforth  without  an  audible  murmur  by  the  natives, 
who  indemnified  themselves  for  their  evil  fortune,  if  evil  it 
was,  by  cultivating  the  arts  of  their  conquerors,  and  declin- 
ing to  renew  an  unavailing  struggle.  Tiie  rapid  advance  of 
Roman  civilization  astonished  the  Romans  themselves.  They 
pictured  the  furthest  Orkneys  prostrate  before  them,  and 
Shetland  inviting  a southern  sophist  to  instruct  her  in  pol 
ished  letters.3  In  no  part  of  their  dominions,  however,  had 
the  happy  results  of  peace  and  security  shown  themselves  in 
fairer  colours.  The  building  of  cities,  the  cultivation  of  the 
land,  the  construction  of  roads,  the  erection  of  neat  or  volup- 
tuous pleasure-houses,  had  converted  the  lair  of  Caesar’s 
. f . painted  savages  into  an  Italian  garden.  Already 
state  of  the  the  warm  and  mineral  springs  had  been  dis- 
covered, which  still  draw  our  health-seekers  to 
Bath  and  Clifton,  to  Cheltenham  and  Matlock ; the  tin,  cop- 
per, and  silver  ores  of  Devon  had  been  worked  with  method 
and  perseverance ; the  iron  of  Gloucestershire  and  Sussex-, 
the  lead  of  Yorkshire,  Derbyshire  and  Salop,  the  coal  of 
W ales,  Staffordshire  and  Durham,  had  all  been  brought  into 
requisition,  to  supply  the  most  essential  wants  of  a thriv- 
ing population,  and  to  pour  their  surplus  into  the  imperial 

1 Fronto,  fragm,  de  bell.  Parth.  322. : “quid,  avo  vestro  Hadriano  imperiuiQ 
obtinente,  quantum  militum  a Judaeis,  quantum  a Britannis  earsurn  ! ” 

s Juvenal,  ii.  in  jin. : “arma  quidem  ultra  Litora  Juvernar  promovimus  ct 
modo  cajtas  Orcadas;”  xv.  112.:  “De  conducendo  loquitur  jam  rhetore 
Thule.”  Martial,  vii.  10.  : “Dicitur  et  nostros  cantare  Britannia  versus.” 
Tacitus,  a graver  authority,  speaks  not  less  pointedly  ( Agric . si.) : “jam  vero 
principum  filios  liberalibus  artibus  erudire,  et  ingenia  Britannorum  studiis  Gal- 
lorum  anteferre,  ut  qui  modo  linguam  Romanam  abnuebant,  eloquentiam  con- 

eupiscerent.” 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


345 


treasury.1  Britain  had  her  own  potteries  and  glass-houses; 
she  grew  large  quantities  of  grain  adapted  to  her  climate, 
and  exported  corn  and  cattle,  as  well  as  handsome  slaves, 
to  the  markets  of  the  continent.  No  Roman  province  was 
more  self-supporting,  or  more  capable,  as  she  proved,  at  least 
for  a moment,  at  a later  period,  of  asserting  her  independence. 
All  this  material  progress  had  been  made  with  little  direct 
instruction  or  aid  from  her  conquerors  ; for  Britain  contained, 
as  far  as  we  know,  but  one,  or  at  most  three  colonies  of  Ro- 
man citizens  ; 2 her  invaders  Avere  still  encamped  on  her  soil 
as  soldiers  in  arms,  and  had  not  yet  laid  down  their  swords 
to  assume  the  implements  of  peace.  Meanwhile  the  greatest 
sphere  of  British  energy  and  activity  seems  to  have  lain  in 
the  northern  rather  than  in  the  southern  parts  of  England. 
Cornwall  and  Devonshire,  and  even  Kent  and  Sussex,  were 
left  in  great  measure  under  the  dominion  of  the  primeval 
forest,  while  Eboracum  or  York  seems  to  have  been  the  chief 
city  of  the  province,  and  the  resources  of  the  country  round 
it  to  have  been  most  thoroughly  explored  and  utilized.  A 

1 Ptolemy,  writing  in  the  age  of  Hadrian,  gives  a list  of  fifty  towns  in 
Southern  Britain.  Coins  of  the  early  emperors  from  Claudius  downwards  have 
been  found  in  various  localities.  Inscriptions  on  pigs  of  lead,  &c.,  refer  to  the 
reigns  of  Claudius,  Vespasian  and  Domitian.  The  account  of  our  island  in  the 
text  is  taken  from  my  general  reading  on  the  subject,  and  I think  it  will  be 
fully  borne  out  by  Mr.  AVright’s  excellent  “ Handbook  of  Britain,”  to  which  he 
gives  the  title  of  “ The  Kelt,  the  Roman,  and  the  Saxon.”  The  greatest  stores 
of  original  information  on  the  subject  of  Roman-British  archaeology  may  be 
found  in  the  Collectanea  Antiqua  of  Mr.  Roach  Smith,  and  in  Dr.  Bruce’s  interest- 
ing work  on  the  Roman  Wall. 

2 The  only  colony  in  the  proper  sense  of  which  we  can  speak  with  certainty 
is  that  of  Claudius  at  Camulodunum  (Colchester).  Isca  Silurum  (Cacrleon), 
and  Deva  (Chester),  are  also  enumerated  by  the  antiquaries  as  permanent  mili- 
tary stations,  and  possibly  are  found  so  entitled  on  inscriptions.  There  is  said 
to  be  the  authority  of  an  inscribed  stone  for  Glevum  (Gloucester)  also ; and 
Lincoln  is  sometimes  added  to  the  list  from  the  name  only.  The  pretender 
Richard  of  Cirencester  adds  Londinium  (London),  Rutupise  (Richborough), 
Aquae  Solis  (Bath),  and  Camboricum  (Cambridge).  This  statement  is  of  no 
authority.  Londinium  and  V erulamium  were  municipia  in  the  time  of  Tacitus, 
and  so  probably  was  Eboracum, 


546 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


stimulus,  no  doubt,  was  given  in  this  quarter  to  productions 
of  all  kinds  by  the  presence  of  the  local  government,  and  of 
the  legions  which  maintained  it.  Eboracum  was  the  seat  of 
the  prefect  with  his  official  staff,  and  the  ministers  of  his 
luxury,  while  Londinium  was  still  a mere  resort  of  traders. 
The  northern  limit  of  the  province  was  as  yet  imperfectly 
Limit  of  Eo-  defined.  Agricola’s  chain  of  forts  between  the 
tio^n  in 'the  a"  Clyde  and  Forth  was  held  by  the  most  advanced 

North.  battalions  ; but  while  many  Roman  settlers  had 

planted  themselves  beyond  the  Cheviots,  and  even  beyond 
the  Forth,  the  camps  he  had  previously  traced  between  the 
Tyne  and  Solway  formed  a stronger  bulwark ; and  this  lower 
line  of  fortifications  commanded  more  respect  than  the  upper 
from  the  roaming  tribes  of  Caledonia,  ever  on  the  watch  to 
harry  the  homesteads  of  the  intruders.  The  line  of  the  Tyne 
formed  practically  the  limit  of  Roman  civilization,  and  the 
settlers  who  dwelt  within  range  of  the  barbarians,  constantly 
subject  to  attacks,  and  ever  appealing  to  the  prefect  for  pro- 
tection, had  recently  suffered,  as  I imagine,  from  an  assault 
of  more  than  ordinary  ferocity,  and  had  engaged  the  presi- 
diary  cohorts  in  a bootless  and  calamitous  campaign.  The 
time  was  come  when  it  was  necessary  to  specify  more  accu- 
rately the  limits  within  which  the  protection  of  Rome  could 
be  fairly  required  and  substantially  afforded. 

In  the  absence  of  historical  statements  we  can  only  con- 

1 Among  the  innumerable  remains  of  Roman  villas  discovered  in  this  island, 
there  is  none,  I believe,  that  has  revealed  by  a fragment  of  inscription  the 
name  and  quality  of  its  owner.  We  do  not  know  whether  the  Roman  civilian 
of  fortune  was  in  the  habit  of  making  his  residence  in  the  country  districts. 
Our  Roman  villas  seem  to  have  been  generally  placed  in  the  vicinity  of  military 
stations,  and  may  have  been  the  pleasure-houses  of  the  officers.  The  designs 
of  their  mosaics,  as  far  as  they  have  been  discovered,  are  said  to  be  limited  to 
two  subjects,  that  of  Neptune  and  the  marine  divinities,  and  that  of  Orpheus; 
the  one  being  an  allusion  to  our  insular  position,  the  other  to  the  progress  of 
civilization  among  us.  The  subject  of  Orpheus  is  specially  appropriated  to 
eating-rooms.  The  Roman  banquet,  with  its  music,  its  recitations,  and  the 
bath  which  preceded  it,  was  a type  of  the  highest  advance  in  social  cultivation 1 
“ Csedibus  et  vietu  foedo  deterruit  Orpheus.”  Hor.  Ars.  Pod.  392. 


A.  U.  872.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


347 


jecture  that  Hadrian  took  his  survey  of  the  state  of  the  Brit- 
ish province  from  Eboracum,  and  that  he  crossed  „ . 

A 1 m Fortification  or 

the  Tyne  in  person  at  the  spot  where  the  HClian  the  upper  isth  • 

. . mus  between 

bridge  was  constructed,  Avhich  grave  its  name  to  Tyne  and  Soi- 
3 ° . way. 

the  military  post  by  which  he  secured  it.1  Of 
his  further  progress  northward  there  is  no  trace  perhaps  re 
maining ; but  it  is  not  improbable  that  he  extended  his  per- 
sonal exploration  to  the  Frith  of  Forth,  before  he  finally 
determined  to  place  the  bulwark  of  the  empire  on  the  lower 
isthmus.  The  neck  of  land  which  separates  the  Solway  from 
the  German  Ocean  is  about  sixty  miles  in  width,  and  is  sin- 
gularly well  adapted  for  the  site  of  a defensive  barrier.  The 
Tyne  and  Irthing  flowing  in  opposite  directions,  east  and 
west,  through  deep  valleys,  present  in  themselves  no  trifling 
obstacles  to  a barbarian  foe,  and  the  tract  of  land  which 
separates  and  screens  their  sources  is  lofty  and  precipitous 
towards  the  north.  The  base  of  this  mountain  ridge  was 
then  lost  also  for  the  most  part  in  swamps,  and  wherever  the 
cliff  was  broken  by  rugged  defiles,  access  to  them  was  ob- 
structed by  dense  forests.  This  advantageous  position  had 
been  seized  by  Agricola,  and  though  his  enemies  impelled 
him  further  northward,  he  did  not  neglect  to  secure  it  as  a 
base  of  operations,  by  the  construction  of  numerous  forts,  or 
entrenched  camps,  which  he  placed  generally  on  the  southern 
slope  of  his  mountain  ramparts.  These  posts  were  connected 
by  a military  way,  and  in  them  the  reserves  of  the  presidiary 
force  were  permanently  collected,  while  a few  cohorts  were 
■advanced  to  the  extreme  boundary  of  the  province  on  the 
upper  isthmus  of  Clyde  and  Forth.  Hadrian  determined  to 
follow  out  on  this  spot  the  same  discreet  and  moderate  policy 
he  had  established  elsewhere.  Without  formally  withdraw- 
ing his  outposts,  or  denuding  of  all  protection  the  provin- 
cials, who  had  settled  under  their  Aving,  he  dreAV  from  the 
Tyne  to  the  Solway  the  ostensible  frontier  of  his  dominions. 

1 Pons  iElii  of  the  “Notitia  Imperii”  is  amply  identified  with  Newcastle 
on-Tyne  by  inscriptions. 


348 


HISTORY  OR  THE  ROMAHS 


[A.  D.  119. 


He  connected  the  camps  of  Agricola  with  a fosse  and  pal- 
isaded rampart  of  earth,  adding  subsidiary  entrenchments,  so 
as  to  strengthen  the  work  with  a fortified  station  at  every 
fourth  or  fifth  mile.1  The  execution  of  this  stupendous 
undertaking  may  have  occupied  the  troops  and  their  native 
assistants  for  several  years ; but  the  chiefs  of  the  empire  re- 
garded it  as  so  important  for  the  security  of  the  province, 
that  they  continued  from  time  to  time  to  supply  additional 
defences.  Severus,  two  generations  later,  may 
Jrian,  of  Seve-  be  supposed  to  have  thrown  up  the  second  line 

-us,  an!  of  the  x i-i  ,,  , , / 

ageofThco-  ol  earthworks,  which  runs  parallel  to  those  of 
Hadrian,  and  is  evidently  formed  to  support 
them ; and  finally  the  stupendous  wall  of  solid  masonry,  of 
which  some  fragmentary  sections  still  remain,  running  as  an 
exterior  bulwark  a few  yards  to  the  northward  from  end  to 
end,  may  be  ascribed,  as  I venture  to  think,  most  probably, 
neither  to  Hadrian  nor  Severus,  but  to  the  age  of  Theodosius 
and  Stilicho.2  Meanwhile  the  camps  which  Agricola  had 
planted  on  the  bleak  rocks  and  moors  of  Horthumbria,  bud- 
ded, in  the  course  of  ages,  into  little  towns,  fenced  with  stone 
walls,  adorned  with  halls  and  temples,  and  on  then’  monu- 
ments were  engraved  the  names  of  prefects  and  centurions, 
as  well  as  of  all  the  gods  and  goddesses  of  the  cosmopolitan 
Olympus  of  the  second  and  third  centuries.  We  know  from 
written  records  that  the  troops  by  -which  these  strongholds 
were  occupied  represented  from  twenty  to  thirty  distinct 
nations.  Along  this  line  of  mutual  communication  Gauls 

1 Spartian,  Hadr.  11.  : “murum  per  octoginta  millia  passuum  primus 
duxit,  qui  barbaros  Romanosque  divideret.”  By  “ murus  ” I understand  the 
earthen  rampart  which  still  exists,  and  may  be  traced  over  a great  part  of  this 
line.  Comp,  the  same  author’s  account  in  c.  12.  of  the  usual  character  of 
Hadrian’s  presidiary  works  : “ per  ea  tempora  et  alias  frequenter  in  plurimis 
locis  in  quibus  barbari  non  fluminibus  sed  limitibus  dividuntur,  stipitibus  mag- 
nis  in  modum  muralis  sepis  funditus  jactis  atque  connexis,  barbaros  separavit.” 

2 This  is  not  the  place  to  enter  into  the  reasoning  with  which  I have  sug- 
gested thin  solution  in  the  Quarterly  Review  for  Jan.  1860.  The  texts  of  Dion 
and  the  Augustan  History,  which  are  cited  to  prove  the  stone  wall  to  be  the 
work  of  Hadrian  or  Severus,  may  very  well  refer  to  the  earthen  ramparts  only 


A.  IT.  872.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


349 


and  Germans,  Thracians  and  Iberians,  Moors  and  Syrians, 
held  the  frontiers  of  the  Roman  empire  against  the  Caledo- 
nian Britons.  Here  some  thirty  languages  resounded  from 
as  many  camps  ; but  the  sonorous  speech  of  Latium,  not 
much  degraded  from  the  tone  still  preserved  on  its  native 
soil,  ever  maintained  its  supremacy  as  the  language  of  com- 
mand and  of  every  official  and  public  document.  On  this 
narrow  strip  of  land  we  may  read  an  epitome  of  the  history 
of  the  Romans  under  the  Empire : for  myself,  I feel  that  all 
I have  read  and  written  on  this  wide  and  varied  subject,  is 
condensed,  as  it  were,  in  the  picture  I realize,  from  a few 
stones  and  earthworks,  of  their  occupation  of  our  northern 
marches.1 

By  this  formidable  barrier  the  incursions  of  the  Caledo- 
nians were  effectually  restrained,  and  the  support  of  the 
large  force  which  held  it  encouraged  the  Roman  settlers  to 
plant  themselves  on  every  eligible  spot  throughout  the  low- 
lands even  beyond  it.  Though  the  region  which  Hadrian  in 
stretches  between  the  two  isthmuses  was  not  120 

yet  incorporated  in  the  Roman  dominions,  or  re-  a.  v.  872,  S73. 
duced  to  the  form  of  a province,  the  immigrants  from  the 
south  felt  sufficiently  secure  in  the  protection  of  Hadrian’s 
lines  below,  and  Agricola’s  forts  above  them.  Fom- legions 
continued  to  occupy  the  possessions  of  the  empire  in  the 
island,  and  the  equanimity  with  which  the  southern  Britons 
bore  the  yoke  might  allow  a large  portion  of  their  force  to 
encamp  in  front  of  the  barbarians  on  the  Tyne  and  Clyde. 
The  duration  of  Hadrian’s  residence  hardly  admits  of  conjec- 
ture ; it  would  seem,  however,  from  a very  enigmatical  state- 
ment of  Spartianus,  that  he  brought  over  the  empress  to 
Britain,  and  probably  established  his  court  there  for  the  win- 

1 Though  I hesitate  to  accept  Dr.  Bruce’s  conclusions  as  to  the  origin  and 
author  of  the  Wall,  I feel  not  the  less  how  deeply  the  students  of  history  are 
indebted  to  the  ability  with  which  he  has  investigated  the  remains  connected 
with  this  subject,  and  produced  in  his  instructive  monograph  a vivid  picture  of 
the  Roman  domination  in  Britain,  which  is  in  fact  a type  of  that  domination 
throughout  the  provinces. 


350 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


ter  of  119-120.  The  terms  on  which  he  lived  with  Sabina 
were  never  cordial ; he  scarcely  refrained,  it  is  said,  from 
putting  her  to  death,  and  declared  at  least  that,  had  he  been 
in  a private  station,  he  would  have  divorced  her;  and  she 
reciprocated  this  dislike,  if  not  with  acts  of  infidelity,  with 
expressions  of  bitter  hatred.  Nevertheless,  she  seems  to 
have  been  the  companion  of  his  journeys,  not  in  Britain  only, 
but  elsewhere;  and  it  was  during  her  sojourn  here  with  him 
that  he  disgraced  his  prefect  Septicius  Clarus,  and  his  sec- 
retary Suetonius  Tranquillus,  for  showing  her  disrespect.1 
That  she  had,  indeed,  much  cause  to  complain  of  his  vicious 
indulgences,  must  be  freely  admitted.  His  detractors  as- 
serted that  in  the  gratification  of  his  passions  he  disregarded 
the  ties  of  friendship  also  ; while  his  jealousy  or  curiosity  led 
him  to  violate  the  common  rules  of  honour,  in  prying  into 
private  correspondence.2 

From  Britain  the  emperor  directed  his  progress  to  the 
South-west.  In  the  course  of  a second  journey  through 
Gaul,  he  commanded,  among  other  acts  of  mu- 

Hadrian  visits  . 

Spain,  mficence  and  splendour,  the  erection  of  a basili- 

a.  d.  120.  r . , „ , . 

ca  at  JN  emausus,  m honour  oi  his  benefactress, 

Plotina,-  who  seems  to  have  died  at  this  period.3  The  next 

step  in  his  pilgrimage  brought  him  into  Spain,  which  he 

1 Septicius  had  succeeded  to  Attianus  as  prefect  of  the  praetorians ; but 

during  the  emperor’s  travels  his  place  was  not  at  the  palace,  but  at  the  prae- 
torium,  whether  in  the  camp  or  elsewhere.  Suetonius  is  the  same  to  whose 
valuable  biography  of  the  first  twelve  Caesars  we  are  so  much  indebted.  As  the 
disgraced  minister  of  Hadrian  we  can  easily  imagine  that  he  gave  currency  to 
the  worst  stories  against  him.  The  account,  however,  of  Spartian  is,  as  I have 
said  in  the  text,  very  enigmatical : “ qui  apud  Sabinam  uxorem,  injussu  ejns, 
familiarius  se  tunc  egerant  quam  reverentia  domus  aulicse  postulabat.” 

3 Spartian,  Sadr.  1.  c. 

3 Of  this  basilica  there  are  no  remains.  The  famous  temple  or  Haison 
carree  is  of  a later  date.  We  do  not  know  of  any  connexion  between  Plotina 
and  the  town  of  Nemausus.  Possibly  she  may  have  attended  Hadrian  in  some 
part  of  his  journeys,  and  have  died  there.  But  Nemausus  was  the  native  place 
of  the  family  of  Antoninus,  whom  Hadrian  afterwards  adopted,  and  whom  he 
had  advanced  in  this  year  (120)  to  the  consulship. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


351 


probably  reached  by  sea,  effecting  his  landing  at  Tarraco, 
where  he  passed  the  ensuing  winter.1  Here  he  convened  an 
assembly  of  the  Iberian  states,  not  to  deliberate,  but  to  re- 
ceive from  his  own  mouth  the  imperial  decrees  regarding 
military  enlistment.  The  provincials,  it  seems,  but  more 
particularly  the  colonists  from  Rome  and  Italy,  had  ventured 
to  resist  the  usual  levy  of  men  for  service ; but  the  emperor’s 
measures,  urged  with  caution  and  judgment,  overcame  their 
opposition.  An  instance  of  Hadrian’s  good  sense  and  temper 
is  here  cited.  While  walking  one  day  in  the  garden  of  his 
host’s  abode,  a slave  suddenly  ran  upon  him  with  a drawn 
sword.  The  man  was  seized,  and  was  found  on  examination 
to  be  insane.  The  emperor,  who  had  shown  the  utmost 
presence  of  mind,  insisted  that  he  should  not  be  punished, 
and  handed  him  over  to  the  physicians.  At  Tarraco  he  re- 
stored the  temple  of  Augustus ; but  his  services  to  the  prov- 
ince were  no  doubt  more  important  and  extensive,  and  we 
find  upon  his  medals,  struck  in  this  country,  the  legend  which 
indeed  accompanies  him  throughout  his  imperial  progresses, 
the  Restorer  of  Spain.  Though  he  did  not  care  to  visit  his 
own  birthplace  on  the  banks  of  the  Bsetis,  he  enriched  it  with 
presents  and  endowments. 

Mauretania  had  never  yet  been  honoured  with  the  pres- 
ence of  a Roman  emperor.  Hadrian  crossed  the  Mediterra- 
nean, and  occupied  himself  in  person  with  tran-  He  visits  Mau- 
quillizing  disturbances  which  had  broken  out  in  tetania, 
that  remote  dependency,  connected  perhaps  with  the  treason- 
able intrigues  of  Lusius.  The  movement,  whatever  its  origin 
or  nature,  was  deemed  by  the  senate  of  sufficient  importance 
to  be  signalized  by  a Supplication.2 3 

A much  longer  stride  bore  him  next  to  the  opposite  ex- 
tremity of  the  empire ; and  it  is  with  some  surprise  and  per- 

1 This,  as  I imagine,  was  the  winter  of  120-121 ; but  neither  Clinton  nor 

Gregorovius  ventures  to  determine  the  date. 

3 Spartian,  Hadrian.  12. : “ motus  Maurorum  compressit  et  a senatu  suppli- 
cationes  emeruit.”  The  title  of  Restorer  of  Mauretania , which  appears  on  his 
coins,  may  refer  to  the  revived  security  of  the  Roman  colonists. 


352 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


Hadrian  on  the  plexity  that  we  hear  of  his  suddenly  appearing 
Parthia,3  oi  on  the  borders  of  Parthia.  The  policy  of  Chos- 
pairsto  I'then's,  roes?  it  seems,  was  dubious,  and  the  state  of  the 
A.n.  122, 123.  eastern  provinces  was  at  this  moment  precarious. 
An  effort  was  required  to  confirm  the  rival  monarch  in  his 
alliance,  and  Hadrian,  averse  even  to  a mere  demonstration 
of  force,  sought  to  secure  his  influence  in  a personal  inter- 
view.1 The  result  seems  to  have  fully  justified  the  judgment 
which  dictated  this  proceeding.  The  Parthian  desisted  from 
any  attempt  to  embroil  the'  dominions  of  the  Roman  poten- 
tate, and  the  two  empires  continued  throughout  the  reign  of 
Hadrian  on  terms  of  peace  and  mutual  forbearance.  From 
Syria  the  emperor  returned  homeward  through  the  province 
of  Asia  Minor,  and  touched  at  some  islands  in  the  HCgean, 
on  his  route  to  Athens.  At  the  Grecian  capital  he  made  a 
more  lengthened  sojourn,  commencing  new  edifices  for  its 
decoration,  and  presiding  at  its  festivals.2  But  Rome  was 
still  the  goal  of  his  long  and  circuitous  progress, 
and  hither  he  once  more  bent  his  steps,  with  but 
one  short  digression  to  visit  Sicily,  and  witness  a 
sunrise  from  the  summit  of  Etna.  From  Rome, 
however,  he  crossed  the  sea  to  Carthage,  and  conferred  many 
benefits  on  the  province  of  Africa.  The  people  there  be- 
stowed on  him  the  usual  compliments  in  return,  and  ascribed 
to  his  auspicious  advent  the  copious  fall  of  rain,  which  at  last, 
after  a five  years’  interval,  bedewed  their  arid  country.' 
From  Africa  he  retraced  his  voyage  to  Rome. 

None  perhaps  of  our  princes , says  Spartian  at  this  junc- 
ture, ever  traversed  so  rapidly  so  large  a portion  of  the  world. 

Hadrian  seems  to  have  generally  alternated  a 

Hadrian’s  sec-  . . . . _ 

ond  progress,  period  of  residence  m winter  with  another,  per- 
haps a longer  period,  of  locomotion  in  the  sum- 


Returns  to 
Rome,  and 
visits  Sicily 
and  Carthage, 
a.  ».  123. 


1 Spartian,  in  Hadrian.  12. : “bellum  PartMcum  per  idem  tempus  in  motu 
tantum  fuit ; idque  Hadriani  eolloquio  repressum  est.” 

2 At  Athens  Hadrian  may  have  passed  the  whiter  of  122-123.  Clinton, 
from  Euseb.  Clironicon. 

3 Spartian,  Hadrian.  13.  22.-  “post  quinquennium  pi  ait ; atque  ideo  ab 
Africanis  dilectus  est.” 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


353 


mer.  The  visit  to  Africa  may  fill  the  interval  between 
two  winters  passed  in  Rome.  The  chronologists  at  least  as- 
sure us  that  he  was  at  Athens  in  the  year  125,  on  his  way, 
as  we  are  informed  by  Spartian,  to  the  East.’  This  was  the 
commencement  of  what  is  generally  designated  as  Hadrian’s 
Second  Progress,  which  embraced  the  greater  part  of  his 
subsequent  reign,  and  included  more  than  one  long  residence 
at  Athens,  with  sojourns  of  some  duration  at  Antioch  and 
Alexandria.  It  was  not  till  the  year  134  that  he  returned 
finally  to  Rome,  and  it  seems  impossible  to  reduce  to  consecu- 
tive order  our  meagre  notices  of  these  various  peregrinations. 
The  most  interesting  incidents  in  this  career  re- 

r His  residence 

fer  to  his  abode  at  Athens  and  Alexandria.  We  at  Alexandria 
. . „ . . _ . and  Athens. 

have  sufficient  authority  to  fix  his  residence  m 
the  Egyptian  capital  to  the  year  131,  and  I imagine  that, 
down  to  the  year  preceding,  he  was  for  the  most  part  domi- 
ciled in  his  favourite  Athens.  The  events  of  the  Jewish  wars 
carried  him  probably  to  Syria  in  132,  and  from  thence,  as  we 
may  infer,  he  conducted  his  second  negotiations  with  Parthia, 
and  there  invited  the  attendance  of  the  chiefs  of  the  Armenian 
border-land.  He  was  unquestionably  at  Athens  once  more 
at  the  end  of  133,  and  there  passed  one  winter,  and  his  final 
return  to  Italy,  which  he  seems  never  again  to  have  quitted, 
may  thus  be  assigned,  as  before  said,  to  the  year  134.  But 
the  political  events  of  this  period  are  either  insignificant,  or 
have  been  already  anticipated ; and  we  may  take  this  oppor- 
tunity to  cast  an  eye  on  the  moral  and  social  spectacles  pre- 
sented by  the  great  cities  of  Athens  and  Alexandria,  the 
rival  universities  of  the  Roman  world. 

However  numerous  and  magnificent  were  the  buildings 

i Clinton  from  Eusebius.  Spartian,  Hadrian.  13.  I suppose  the  winters 
123-124,  124-125  to  have  been  passed  at  Rome  : the  second  being  subsequent 
to  the  return  from  Africa.  I must  allow,  however,  that  Spartian  says : “ cum 
post  Alricam  Romam  redisset  statim  ad  Orientem  profectus  per  Athenas  iter 
fecit.”  The  word  “statim”  may  indeed  mean,  “as  soon  as  ever  the  next 
season  for  travelling  arrived.”  But  the  chronology  of  Eusebius  would  allow  of 
Iladrian  passing  this  winter,  124-125,  at  Athens. 


354 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


of  Trajan,  lie  must  yield  the  palm,  with  every  other  imperial 
Works  of  Ha-  builder,  to  Hadrian,  who  possessed  the  taste,  and 
embeiHskment  ^ad  acquired  even  the  technical  knowledge  of 
of  Athens.  an  architect,  and  enjoyed,  as  no  architect  be- 
fore or  since,  the  means  and  opportunity  of  executing  his 
own  favourite  conceptions.  In  Greece,  as  elsewhere,  the 
works  by  which  this  prince  obtained  the  title  of  Restorer, 
were  not  confined  to  political  and  social  improvements,  but 
referred  more  commonly  to  the  creation  of  solid  and  material 
monuments,  to  the  erection  of  aqueducts  and  baths,  temples 
and  libraries,  and  the  disposition  of  streets,  squares,  and  pub- 
lic places.  The  ancient  city  of  Pericles  had  suffered  for  ages 
a gradual  decline  in  wealth  and  population.  The  sack  under 
Sulla  was  a blow  from  which  a community  in  decay,  sus- 
tained by  no  provincial  dependencies,  could  with  difficulty 
recover ; and  it  was  only  the  peculiar  advantage  it  possessed, 
as  the  home  of  arts  and  learning,  and  the  object  of  special 
solicitude  and  veneration  to  liberal  minds,  that  enabled  the 
seat  of  the  Muses  to  retain  its  place  at  the  head  of  Academic 
institutions.  But  the  halls  and  temples  which  had  adorned 
the  free  state  with  the  purest  models  of  architectural  embel- 
lishment still  towered  above  the  city  and  the  plain  in  their 
graceful  forms  and  noble  proportions;  though  repeatedly 
despoiled  of  more  portable  works  of  art,  not  the  temples  and 
halls  only,  but  the  streets  and  forums  still  glistened  with  ex- 
quisite figures  in  brass  or  marble  ; the  shapely  block  of  the 
Theseium  was  rooted  in  the  soil  of  which  it  seems  even  now 
a natural  product,  and  the  figure  of  protecting  Pallas  still 
stood,  where  it  stands  no  longer,  on  the  steadfast  throne  of 
the  Acropolis.1  In  better  times,  besides  its  public  buildings, 

1 The  account  of  Pausanias,  a few  years  later,  shows  how  Athens  then 
abounded  in  ancient  temples  and  works  of  art  Whatever  may  have  been  the 
spoliations  of  the  old  Roman  proconsuls,  and  at  a later  period  of  Nero,  wcmay 
observe  that  this  writer  specifies  many  works  of  Phidias,  Praxiteles,  and  other 
illustrious  artists,  as  still  visible  at  Athens.  Most  of  these,  however,  were  of 
marble,  only  one  or  two  of  gold  or  silver.  The  cupidity  of  the  conquerors  had 
been  tempted  by  the  precious  material  rather  than  the  precious  workmanship. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


355 


Athens  was  noted  for  the  splendour  of  many  private  dwell- 
ings : the  well-known  features  of  the  Roman  mansion,  with 
its  sumptuous  array  of  central  court  and  surrounding  dwell- 
ing-rooms, were  modelled,  with  allowance  for  the  difference 
of  eastern  and  western  manners,  on  the  type  of  the  Grecian 
and  Athenian.  The  Eupatrid®  of  Athens,  indeed,  had  never 
rivalled  the  Roman  patricians  in  the  splendour  of  their  lodg- 
ing, as  they  had  never  equalled  them  in  wealth,  and  the  num- 
ber of  the  rich  among  the  inhabitants  of  the  Grecian  city 
was  doubtless  much  smaller  than  at  Rome.  The  poorer 
classes  at  Athens  were  not  the  clients  of  the  wealthy,  and 
their  humble  tenements  were  not,  I suppose,  clustered  around 
the  walls  of  the  noble  mansion,  but  stood  each  apart  in  all 
their  poverty  and  nakedness.  Nor  was  the  meanness  of  each 
separate  cabin  carried  off,  as  at  Rome,  by  the  aggregation 
of  house  upon  house,  for  they  were  generally  of  a single 
floor,  and  it  was  only  in  their  material, — for  no  material  at 
Athens  was  readier  than  stone  or  even  marble, — that  they 
excelled  the  most  squalid  den  of  the  Roman  proletary.  The 
Greeks  were,  moreover,  a far  less  cleanly  people  than  the 
Romans,  and  as  they  paid  little  regard  to  their  personal  ab- 
lutions, they  held,  it  may  be  presumed,  in  still  less  honour 
the  neatness  of  their  dwellings  and  their  streets.1  We  must 
picture  Athens  to  ourselves,  at  this  period,  as  a dirty  city  in 
decay : we  must  imagine  the  combination  of  a site  of  unri- 
valled magnificence,  of  mingled  slope  and  level,  formed  by 
nature  for  enhancing  to  the  utmost  the  graces  and  harmonies 
of  constructive  art,  with  a throng  of  mouldering  fanes  and 
neglected  mansions,  which  alternated,  along  its  straggling 

1 See  Dr.  Smith’s  excellent  article  on  “ Athens  ” in  the  Did.  of  Class. 
Geography,  with  his  references  to  Aristophanes,  Dicsearchus,  and  especially  to 
Etrabo,  v.  p.  235.  Rain-water  was  probably  collected  in  tanks,  and  the  lime- 
stone rock  on  which  Athens  is  situated,  was  apparently  perforated  with  chan. 
Dels  which  brought  supplies  from  more  distant  reservoirs  and  fountains.  The 
dust  of  the  modern  city  is  described  as  intolerable.  Hadrian  constructed  the 
only  aqueduct.  There  were  three  or  four  springs  in  the  city,  but  one  only,  that 
of  Callirrhoe,  was  drinkable,  and  this  for  a population  computed  by  Bocldi, 
under  the  free  state,  at  180,000 ! Publ.  Peon,  of  Athens , i.  56. 


358 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMAN’S 


avenues,  with  low  and  squalid  cabins,  scarcely  raised  above 
the  filth  and  rottenness  accumulated  around  them ; on  which 
every  rent  and  stain  of  time  was  rendered  painfully  con- 
spicuous by  a sun  of  unclouded  splendour,  except  when  ob- 
scured by  whirlwinds  of  dust  generated  on  the  bare  lime- 
stone rock,  treeless,  grassless,  and  waterless.1 *  Hadrian  may 
have  done  for  Athens  what  Nero  did  for  Rome,  in  recon- 
structing large  portions  of  the  city  in  the  open  and  luxurious 
style  of  Antioch  and  Ephesus.  One  quarter,  which  he  either 
wholly  rebuilt,  or  so  beautified  that  it  might  pass  for  his 
own  building,  received,  at  least  in  popular  language,  the  des- 
ignation of  Hadrian opolis ; and  on  the  gate  which  led  into 
it  from  the  ancient  city  were  inscriptions  purporting  to  dis- 
tinguish the  town  of  Theseus  from  the  town  of  Hadrian.3 * * * * 
He  may  have  repaired  and  cleansed  the  public  buildings ; 
but  the  barbaric  intermixture  of  splendour  and  squalor 
which  characterizes  a declining  community,  could  hardly  be 
effaced  by  the  most  liberal  encouragement  to  monumental 
magnificence.  Temples  of  Zeus  and  Here  rose  at  his  com- 
mand in  connexion  with  the  names  of  the  emperor  and 
the  empress,  and  another  fane,  inscribed  to  All  the  Gods , 
may  have  been  designed  to  emulate  the  Roman  Pantheon.8 

1 It  is  fortunate,  perhaps,  that  nothing  is  told  us  of  the  drainage  of  Athens ; 
no  great  city  was  ever  so  badly  placed  for  due  abstersion  by  natural  outfall 

The  brook  Ilissus  was  a mere  open  sewer  which  stagnated  in  a marsh.  No 
wonder  that  the  poets  avoid  all  allusion  to  it.  Statius,  only,  says  of  it  most 
heedlessly:  “ Ilissus  multa  purgavit  lumina  lympha.”  7%e6.viii.extr.  Even 
Socrates  took  his  friend  to  its  banks  above  the  city.  Plato,  Phcedr.  init. 

3 The  arch  is  still  existing,  and  is  reputed  to  have  great  architectural  merit. 
The  inscriptions  are : al  5’  ela’  'ASpiavov  kovxI  Qrjceug  tt6Xic,  on  the  one  side : 
al  &’  ela’  ’Adijvai  QrjatoQ  rj  irplv  ir6Xig  on  the  other.  Grater,  Inscript,  p.  lOW. 

1.  Gregorovius,  Gesch.  Hadr.  p.  205. 

3 Pausan.  Attic.  18.  9.  'Adpiavoc  tie  KaretwEvaaaTO  ph>  ml  aTAa  ' AQrpiaU 

oi£,  vabv  "H pag,  Kal  Aide  HavePAjp’iov,  ml  &eoig  role  w aatv  lepbv  koiv6v  .... 

’Adrjvat  fiev  ovrug  vtto  tov  iroXepov  naKudeicai  tov  'Vupaiuv  avdig  'ASpiavov 
paaOievovrog  yvdj/aa v.  At  Athens  and  elsewhere  this  emperor  is  said  to  have 
erected  temples  without  any  image  of  a god.  It  was  believed  that  he  meant 

them  to  be  dedicated  to  himself.  At  a later  period  the  Christians  imagined 
that  he  had  intended  them  for  the  pure  worship  of  Jesus.  LampridiusmMfen 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


357 


But  of  all  these  gorgeous  structures  none  was  so  illustrious 
as  the  Olympieum,  the  great  national  temple  of  the  Hellenic 
Jupiter,  commenced  on  a scale  far  transcending  any  monu- 
ment of  Greek  or  Roman  piety  by  the  aspiring  genius  of 
Pisistratus.  The  work  had  languished  through  the  ages  of 
Athenian  independence.  The  bold  conception  was  revived 
by  the  usurper  Epiphanes ; and  the  temple,  profaned  and 
rifled  by  the  brutal  violence  of  Sulla,  was  restored  and  car- 
ried a stage  nearer  to  completion  by  Augustus,  aided  by  the 
contributions  of  eastern  potentates.1  Still  the  Olympieum 
stood  a colossal  fragment,  embracing  within  the  limits  of  its 
columned  precincts  an  area  of  two  hundred  yards  square,  in 
which  it  precisely  corresponded  with  the  Temple  of  Jerusa- 
lem. But  the  fane  itself  far  exceeded  in  magnitude  its  east- 
ern rival,  its 'dimensions  being  171  feet  in  width  and  354  in 
depth,  while  its  columns  rose  to  the  enormous  height  of  60 
feet  and  upwards.  Such  at  least  was  the  design,  still  unfin- 
ished, which  Hadrian  undertook  to  complete,  in  its  full  pro- 
portions. Among  the  decorations  of  this  marvellous  edifice, 
in  which  sculpture,  painting,  and  gilding  bore  a part,  were 
numerous  statues  of  the  imperial  builder  himself,  placed  as 
votive  offerings  by  states  and  sovereigns.  But  the  king  of 
gods  and  men  occupied  the  cell  in  a glorious  image  of  gold 
and  ivory,  which  emulated  the  masterpiece  of  Phidias  at 
Olympia.  This  combination  of  materials  may  seem  grotesque 
to  our  uneducated  eyes  ; but  the  Greeks  had  cultivated  their 
taste  in  the  application  of  colour  to  statuary,  and  they  had 
learnt  to  estimate,  perhaps  not  unduly,  the  beauty  of  the  soft 
warm  tint  which  the  glowing  metal  may  cast  over  the  paler 
substance.3 

Sever.  41.  It  is  most  likely  that  these  ideas  were  founded  merely  on  some 
casual  or  temporary  omission.  According  to  Spartian,  however,  Hadrian  set 
up  an  altar  to  his  own  divinity  at  Athens,  and  in  Asia  at  least  he  did  not  scru- 
ple to  build  himself  temples.  Spartian,  Hadr.  13. 

1 See  above,  ch.  xxxiii. 

a Pausan.  Attic.  18.  6,  7.  The  painting  of  statues,  and  the  mixture  of 
metals  used  for  them,  had  often  a conventional  meaning.  Thus  Pliny,  xxxiv 


358 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


Vehement  was  the  gratitude  of  the  Athenians  for  the  ac- 
complishment of  a work  which  placed  their  city  once  more 
The  Athenians  at  a summit  of  architectural  splendour  ; hut  there 
with' the* title  Avas  lxtt*e  t1iat  could  offer  in  return  to  the 

of  oiympius.  master  of  the  Roman  world.  The  title  of  Archon, 
by  which  their  first  municipal  officer  was  still  designated, 
whose  functions  were  religious  rather  than  political,  carried 
with  it  only  the  charm  of  its  antique  associations.  Such  as  it 
was,  however,  it  seems  to  have  been  tendered  to  Hadrian  at  a 
much  earlier  time,  when  as  a mere  private  visitor,  yet  uncon- 
nected with  the  reigning  family,  he  had  displayed  his  interest 
in  Athens  by  devoting  himself  to  her  special  studies.  The 
style  of  Oiympius,  which  they  now  appended  to  his  name  on 
coins  and  marbles,  bore  a direct  reference  to  the  munificence 
with  which  he  had  lodged  the  lord  of  heaven  in  the  most 
sumptuous  of  earthly  habitations ; but  it  conveyed,  no  doubt, 
an  indirect  compliment  of  another  kind  ; for  Pericles,  the 
greatest  of  their  historic  heroes,  had  been  styled  Olympian, 
for  the  thunders  of  his  eloquence,  and  the  overwhelming 
Athens  the  power  he  wielded  in  the  state.  Athens  still  main- 
fity  omhe^to-  tained  her  preeminence  as  the  mistress  of  elo- 
man  world.  quence  and  learning.  Athens  was  the  ancient 

classic  university  of  the  civilized  world.  The  splendour  of 
an  individual  reputation  might  suffice  to  found  an  academy 
at  other  places  of  educational  resort ; the  disciples  of  a popu- 
lar rhetorician  or  philosopher  might  maintain  for  two  or 
more  generations  the  school  of  which  he  had  laid  the  foun- 
dations ; but  the  ephemeral  brilliancy  of  Rhodes,  Tarsus  or 
Halicarnassus,  was  lost  in  the  constant  and  steady  light 
which  had  beamed  for  five  centuries  from  the  halls  of  Plato 
and  Aristotle.  While  hundreds  of  erudite  professors  of  every 


40.,  says  of  a certain  artist : “ ses  ferrumque  miscuit,  ut  rubigine  ejus  per  nito- 
rem  oris  relucente  exprimeretur  verecundiae  rubor.”  See  on  this  subject  Feuer- 
bach, der  Vatican.  Apollo , p.  1S4,  foil.  The  reflection  of  gold  on  ivory  im- 
parted a warm  tint,  and  the  appearance  of  a supernatural  body;  at  least  such 
was  the  understanding  between  the  artist  and  the  more  enlightened  of  the  wor 
shippers. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


359 


art,  and  of  all  learning,  wandered  from  the  centre  of  ancient 
discipline  to  instruct  in  their  own  homes  the  patrician  youth 
of  Italy  and  the  provinces,  mankind  still  recognised  in  un- 
diminished force  the  necessity  of  a course  of  study  at  Athens 
itself,  to  equip  the  complete  scholar  and  gentleman,  the  most 
accomplished  product  of  intellectual  training.1 

The  instruction,  however,  imparted  in  these  venerable 
seats  was  of  a highly  conventional  character.  None  but  a 
weak  enthusiast  here  and  there  maintained  with  conservative 
the  fervour  of  genuine  belief  the  tenets  of  any  ^university 
one  of  the  philosophic  sects,  each  of  which  had  of  Athens- 
reigned  in  turn,  or  had  contended  with  rival  claims  in  the 
schools  of  Athens.  On  every  side  it  was  tacitly  acknowl- 
edged that  the  limits  of  each  specific  dogma  had  been  reached, 
and  that  either  all  must  be  abandoned  together  as  shadowy 
and  baseless,  or  each  be  allowed  to  hold  its  authority  un- 
questioned within  its  own  province.  To  admit  the  first 
alternative  would  have  been  treason  to  the  sovereignty  of 
the  human  understanding,  an  insult  to  the  memory  of  the 
mighty  dead ; but  the  second  was  well  adapted  to  recom- 
mend itself  to  an  age  still  devoted  to  study,  still  curious 
about  psychological  laws,  but  which  despaired  of  arriving  at 
conclusive  results  in  any  direction.  The  broad  principle  that 
all  ancient  doctrines  were  true  enough  to  be  taught,  was  the 
charter  of  the  great  Grecian  university.  Accordingly,  all 
such  doctrines  were  admitted  to  the  rights  of  domicile  in  it ; 
all  were  established,  and  endowed  with  public  salaries  or  by 
private  liberality  ; all  were  allowed  to  be  equally  important 
for  the  education  of  the  ripe  and  perfect  scholar;  and  the 

1 Aules  Gellius,  writing  at  Athens  about  this  time,  gives  a glimpse  occa- 
sionally of  the  habits  of  the  young  men  who  met  for  study  at  Athens.  His  ac- 
count is  perhaps  rather  satirical.  See  the  description  of  the  supper  given  by 
the  philosopher  Taurus  {Nod.  Att.  xi.  13.)  ; and  of  the  way  in  which  the  stu- 
dents kept  the  Saturnalia  : “ quaerebantur  autem  res  hujusmodi : aut  sententia 
poet se  veteris  lepide  obscura,  non  anxie ; aut  historiae  antiquioris  requisitio ; 
aut  decreti  cujuspiam  ex  philosophia  perperam  invulgati ; aut  captionis  sophist 
icse  solutio ; aut  inopinati  rariorisve  verbi  indagatio.”  xviii.  2. 


360 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


teachers  of  all  lived  together  in  a state  of  conventional  an- 
tagonism not  incompatible  with  entire  social  harmony,  and 
almost  jovial  good  fellowship.  Academics  and  Peripatetics, 
Stoics  and  Epicureans,  Pyrrhonists  and  Cynics  disputed  to- 
gether, or  thundered  one  against  another  simultaneously 
through  the  morning,  and  bathed,  dined,  and  joked  in  com- 
pany with  easy  indifference  all  the  evening.  Of  new  opin- 
ions, of  real  inquiries,  of  exclusive  enthusiasm  they  were  all 
perhaps  equally  jealous ; but  Athens  was  eminently  a con- 
servative University,  and  the  men  who  yearned  for  actual 
truth,  and  still  dreamed,  if  it  was  but  a dream,  that  after  six 
hundred  years  of  free  speculation,  the  truth  had  been  ever 
missed,  but  might  yet  be  discovered,  did  not  generally  repair 
to  the  Academy  or  Lyceum  in  search  of  it. 

If,  however,  the  matter  of  this  scholastic  teaching  was  so 
little  regarded,  if  it  was  understood  that  there  was  nothing 
The  professor-  new  he  said  for  Academism  or  Peripateticism, 
tabitehedat3"  tliat  conviction  and  persuasion  on  the  most  vener- 
Athens.  able  subjects  of  ancient  debate  were  altogether 

out  of  date,  the  manner  of  teaching  and  expounding  seemed 
to  be  thought  worthy  of  more  serious  attention  than  ever. 
The  language,  the  style,  even  the  gesture  and  demeanour  of 
the  lecturer,  attracted  hearers  who  would  have  paid  little  heed 
to  vehement  assertions  of  the  truth  and  soundness  of  his 
principles.  To  imbue  the  disciple  with  the  idiom  of  the  best 
Attic  literature,  was  now  considered  essential  to  a liberal 
education ; and  the  writings  of  this  age,  which  emanated 
from  the  schools  of  Greece,  are  coloured  by  a direct  and  not 
unsuccessful  imitation  of  Xenophon  and  his  contemporaries. 
In  expounding  the  arts  of  composition  there  may  have  been 
more  originality.  Had  the  masters  of  rhetoric  of  a more 
genial  era  taken  equal  pains  with  their  successors  in  the  sec- 
ond century  to  mould  the  forms  of  speech  and  writing,  we 
should  scarcely  have  lost  all  traces  of  their  labours,  while  we 
retain  the  technical  precepts  of  Hermogenes,  illustrated  by 
the  laboui'ed  exercitations  of  Dion,  Maximus  and  Aristides. 
The  name  of  Sophist  had  long  recovered  from  whatever 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


361 


obloquy  bad  been  cast  on  it  by  Socrates,  and  was  extended 
to  embrace  the  doctors  and  professors  in  all  branches  of  liter- 
ary acquirement.  The  nobility  of  Rome  thronged  to  listen 
to  their  eloquence ; crowds  not  of  scholars  and  neophytes 
only,  but  of  mature  and  accomplished  men  of  the  world, 
attended  upon  their  lectures,  admired  and  discussed  their  re- 
spective merits,  attached  themselves  to  their  classes,  and 
caught  up  their  watchwords,  though  no  germ  of  truth  per- 
haps had  been  discovered  or  suggested  by  them  through  the 
long  period  of  their  sovereignty.  For  half  a century  these 
lecturers  had  been  salaried  by  the  imperial  treasury,  and 
though  the  academic  system  had  not  yet  attained  its  full 
development,  we  may  speak  even  now  of  the  established 
hierarchy  of  the  sophists  at  Athens,  the  chief  of  whom  occu- 
pied what  was  called  by  way  of  eminence  the  throne  of  the 
university.  Of  the  three  principal  chairs,  those  of  Sophistics 
or  Rhetoric,  of  Politics  and  Philosophy,  that  of  Sophistics 
took  the  first  rank,  and  Avas  endowed  with  a stipend  of 
10,000  drachmae,  equivalent  perhaps  to  500?.  j1  but  the 
stipend  was  probably  the  least  part  of  the  emoluments  of  a 
place  which  commanded  the  whole  market  of  private  tuition. 
One  Chrestus  declined  a recommendation  for  it  to  the  empe- 
ror, in  whose  patronage  it  lay,  saying  in  his  affected  way, 
The  myriad  makes  not  the  man  ; but  in  fact  he  was  the  well- 
feed  tutor  of  a hundred  private  pupils,  a position  which  no 
imperial  liberality,  then  or  since,  could  easily  improve.  The 
throne , however,  possessed  the  advantage  of  being  a place 
for  life.  Philagrus,  who  once  ascended  it,  may  have  won 
the  eminence  by  the  vigour  and  vehemence  of  his  character : 
he  had  been  known  to  box  the  ears  of  an  inattentive  listener. 
But  the  mild  Aspasius,  who  lounged  indolently  on  his  cush- 
ions to  old  age,  and  cared  not,  while  he  drew  his  stipend, 
whether  his  audience  listened  or  not,  was  reproached  by 

1 Philostratus,  Vit.  Sophist,  ii.  2.  20.  Comp.  Lucian,  Eunuch.  3.  Philos- 
tratus  elsewhere  seems  to  state  one  talent,  25Z.,  as  the  salary  of  the 
i tp6voc  at  Athens,  which  I do  not  understand.  Fit.  Soph.  ii.  20.  Tatiai? 
[Apol.  p.  70.)  mentions  the  sum  of  600  aurei,  or  guineas. 

131 


3G2 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


public  opinion  for  not  resigning  a distinction  of  which  he 
proved  himself  unworthy.1 

The  fashion  of  playing  at  oratory  by  sham  contests  on 
factitious  subjects  enjoyed  a marvellous  vitality  in  the  ancient 
Fhe  sophists  at  world.  At  Rome  the  genuine  contests  of  the 
Character  of  forum  were  replaced  by  the  exercises  not  wholly 
ttsir  teaching,  unreal  of  the  imperial  bar ; in  many  modern 
states  the  absence  of  political  discussion  has  been  partly  com- 
pensated by  the  sphere  of  influence  allotted  to  the  pulpit ; 
but  it  is  one  of  the  problems  of  social  history  to  account  for 
the  interest  so  long  felt  or  feigned  in  the  schools  of  ancient 
Greece,  for  the  mere  shadows  of  thought  and  speculation 
by  which  they  were  occupied.  The  facile  eloquence  of  the 
sophists  seems  to  have  been  exercised  equally  in  the  illustra- 
tion of  philosophical  tenets,  and  in  the  discussion  of  themes 
for  declamation.  The  clever  and  learned  personages  enu- 
merated in  long  succession  by  Philostratus  in  his  Lives  of 
the  most  distinguished  of  the  class,  who  were  the  admiration 
of  Athens  and  all  Hellas  for  more  than  a century,  are  cele- 
brated by  him  rather  for  their  rhetorical  powers  than  for 
their  skill  in  the  exposition  of  dogmas,  though  their  philo- 
sophical science  seems  to  be  taken  for  granted.  His  pane- 
gyric, enlivened  as  it  often  is  by  anecdotes  of  wit  and  char- 
acter, fails  for  the  most  part  to  convey  to  us  distinct  personal 
conceptions  ; nevertheless  the  general  character  of  the  class 
is  portrayed  with  much  vividness.  Born  in  various  cities  of 
Greece  and  Asia,  and  generally  gravitating  to  Athens  as 
their  natural  home,  it  is  curious  to  observe  how  many  of 
them  were  related  to  the  Roman  aristocracy,  and  could  boast 

1 Philostr.  Vil.  Sophist,  ii.  8.  33.  Marquardt  in  Becker’s  Alterthumer , iii.  2. 
p.  87.,  has  collected  in  a note  the  principal  passages  which  relate  to  the  endow- 
ment of  learned  men  by  Yespasian  and  his  successors.  Of  Hadrian,  Spartian 
says  expressly,  c.  16. : “ omnes  professores  et  honoravit  et  divites  fecit  . . 
docteres  qni  professioni  suae  inhabiles  videbantur,  ditatos  honoratosque  a pio> 
fessione  dimisit.”  The  liberality  of  Hadrian  seems  to  have  been  further  ex 
tended  by  Antoninus  Pius  and  Alexander  Severus. 


TINDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


363 


a connexion  with  senators  and  consnlars.  Such 

. Polemon. 

was  the  case  with  Polemon,  to  whom  Trajan 
granted  the  privilege  of  exemption  from  taxes,  an  exemption 
extended  by  Hadrian  to  his  posterity ; whom  his  own  country- 
men at  Smyrna  so  praised  and  flattered,  that  he  could  ven- 
ture to  say  to  the  Athenians,  You  have  some  credit , gentlemen , 
for  being  intelligent  hearers  ; allow  me  to  test  your  capacity  ; 
who  was  so  eloquent  that  the  eloquent  Herodes  dared  not 
speak  after  him ; but  who  dying  at  the  age  of  fifty-six,  which 
in  other  professions  might  be  considered  old,  was  reputed  a 
mere  youth  in  sophistry,  for  the  sophist  continues  learning 
to  the  last,  and  storing  up  the  fruits  of  exercise  and  experi- 
ence.1 Such  was  the  great  Herodes  himself,  de-  Herodes  Atti- 
scended  on  the  one  side  from  Roman  consulars,  cua- 
on  the  other  from  the  mythic  PEacidse,  the  inheritor  of 
immense  riches,  which  he  used  so  well,  that  Plutus,  it  was 
said,  though  blind  with  others,  opened  wide  his  eyes  when  he 
showered  blessings  on  this  generous  favourite ; who  found  a 
treasure,  which  when  he  declared  to  ISTerva  it  was  more  than 
he  could  use,  the  emperor  in  his  boundless  confidence  bade 
him  then  abuse  j who  received  the  name  of  Atticus  not  only 
for  his  love  to  Athens,  like  the  Roman  Pomponius,  but  for 
the  endowments  he  had  heaped  upon  it,  and  the  buildings  he 
had  erected ; but  who  was  so  devoted  to  rhetorical  study,  so 
anxious  for  success  in  art,  that  being  deputed  to  address  the 
emperor  for  his  favourite  city,  and  unfortunately  breaking 
down  from  nervousness,  he  rushed  to  the  river  bank — so  ran 
the  story — to  drown  himself.2 

The  vanity  and  frivolity  of  these  masters  of  word-fence 
have  often  been  depicted,  and  the  most  salient  features  of 

1 Philostr.  Vit.  Sophist,  i.  25.  On  the  occasion  of  the  dedication  of  the 
Olympieum,  Polemo  ascended  the  steps  of  the  portico  and  made  an  enthusias- 
tic harangue  to  the  people : 6 <5d  Zxmep  d66ei,  CTTjaag  Tovg  b<p6a\povg  h ~l  rdf 
t]Sr)  irapiGrapevae  cwoiac,  eiratpijKev  kavrov  rip  Uya,  teal  airb  rfjQ  KpT/TriSor;  tov 
vet)  SteMxBt]  rroA/ld  Kal  ■davpama,  irpooiptov  Troiovpevog  tov  a 6yov,  to  pfj  aDeel 
rf/v  rcepl  aiiTov  bpprjv  yevecdai  oi.  Vit.  Sophist,  i.  3. 

* Philostr.  Vit.  Sophist,  ii.  1. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 

their  life  and  conversation  may  easily  he  made  to 
appear  more  ridiculous  than  they  really  were. 
They  have  had  the  misfortune,  however,  of  being 
most  particularly  described  to  us  by  a generation  even  more 
frivolous  than  their  own,  and  Ave  must  not  accept  without 
reserve  the  character  of  the  men  and  their  system  as  por- 
trayed by  the  pencil  of  Philostratus.  The  remains  of  Plu- 
tarch’s voluminous  writings  show  that  he  rose  far  above  the 
level  of  the  Polemon  or  Herodes  of  our  biographer.  He  was 
at  least  an  earnest  believer  in  his  own  creed,  and  conscien- 
tious in  the  practice  of  the  virtues  he  commended.  In  the 
reign  of  Domitian,  and  almost  under  the  shadow  of  Domi- 
tian’s  palace,  the  sage  of  Chferonea  lectured  to  a Roman 
audience  on  the  highest  ends  of  life,  and  the  true  measure  of 
happiness  and  goodness.  His  teaching  had  for  the  most  part 
a direct  moral  object,  with  little  tendency  to  speculative 
refinements.  He  cared  not  for  the  name  of  any  sect  or  leader, 
but  pleaded  the  cause  of  moral  beauty  in  the  interest  of  truth 
only.  What  his  precepts  wanted  in  authority  Avas  abun- 
dantly supplied  by  the  examples  with  which  his  wide  histori- 
cal knowledge  could  illustrate  them.  Plutarch’s  Parallel 
Lives  are  eminently  philosophy  teaching  by  example.  And 
in  estimating  the  moral  aspect  of  the  times,  and  the  influence 
of  the  teachers,  we  must  not  fail  to  remark  the  soundness  of 
this  writer’s  moral  judgments  as  displayed  throughout  his 
compositions.  There  is  no  work  perhaps  of  antiquity  that 
Christian  parents  can  put  so  securely  into  the  hands  of  their 
children  ; the  Christian  statesman  may  draw  lessons  from  it 
in  Avisdom,  and  the  Christian  moralist  in  virtue.  The  work 
is,  in  another  point  of  vieAV,  a curious  monument  of  its  epoch. 
The  author’s  object  was  to  draw  a fair  and  friendly  com- 
parison between  the  Greeks  and  the  Romans,  his  own  country- 
men and  the  foreigner  ; between  the  conquered  and  the 
conquerors,  the  spoiled  and  the  spoilers,  the  slaves  and  the 
masters  ; between  men  whom  other  censors  would  have  ever 
delighted  to  contrast  as  the  spiritual  Hellene  and  the  brutal 
Italian,  or  again  as  the  cringing  Grseculus  and  the  lofty 


364 


The  philoso- 
pher and  his- 
torian Plu- 
tarch. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


365 


Romulides.  Yet,  throughout  this  long  series  of  lives,  this 
glittering  array  of  virtues  and  vices,  personal  and  national, 
there  is  no  word,  I think,  of  subservience  or  flattery,  of  scorn 
or  vanity,  of  humiliation  or  triumph,  to  mark  the  position  of 
the  writer  in  the  face  of  his  Roman  rulers.  Whether  we 
consider  the  book  as  addressed  to  the  Greeks  or  to  the  Ro- 
mans, the  absence  of  any  such  indications  of  feeling  is  un- 
doubtedly remarkable.  To  me  it  seems  most  honourable 
both  to  the  one  people  and  to  the  other ; moreover,  it  is 
invaluable  for  the  insight  it  gives  us  into  the  prevalent  senti- 
ment of  the  unity  of  all  races  and  classes  under  a common 
dispensation. 

Of  the  celebrated  sophist,  Apollonius  of  Tyana,  the  most 
illustrious  preacher  of  this  dispensation,  little  can  safely  be 
advanced,  inasmuch  as  all  our  knowledge  of  him  Apolloninsof 
comes  through  the  distorting  medium  of  the  T-’‘1Iia- 
romance,  miscalled  his  life,  by  Philostratus.  The  remarks 
which  would  naturally  be  challenged  by  that  singular  per- 
formance belong  to  the  historian  of  the  third  century  rather 
than  of  the  second.  All  that  can  here  be  properly  said  of  its 
hero  is,  that  he  deserves  notice  as  the  first  perhaps  of  those 
itinerant  homilists  who  began,  from  the  Flavian  period,  to 
go  about  proclaiming  moral  truths,  collecting  groups  of  hear- 
ers, and  sowing  the  seed  of  spiritual  wisdom  and  knowledge 
on  every  soil  that  could  receive  it.  It  was  by  the  first  Chris- 
tian teachers  that  the  example  of  this  predication  was  set ; 
and  the  effect  produced  on  thoughtful  spirits  by  the  conspic- 
uous career  of  St.  Paul  and  his  associates  is  evinced,  to  my 
apprehension,  by  the  self-imposed  mission  of  Apollonius  in 
the  second,  and  of  Dion  in  the  third  generation  after  them. 

Of  the  life,  the  conduct,  and  the  specific  teaching  of  Dion 
( 'hrysostomus,  sp  called  by  his  contemporaries  for  his  emi- 
nent eloquence,  we  possess  details  on  which  we 

x 1 x .Dion  Prusasns, 

can  rely,  whence  we  may  learn  what  service  a suinamed 

, . , . , . , . . , „ . , . Chryeostomus. 

high-minded  soplnst  might  perform  in  the  inter- 
ests of  morality.1  In  his  younger  days,  while  yet  a mere 

* Phiiostr.  Vtt.  Sophist  i.  V. : Aicova  Se  tov  Tlpvcaiov  ovk  olff  oti  XP^i  vpo. 
treiireiv  rrjv  ec  Travra  aoErrjv.  ’A uaXdeiag  yao  nioag  yv,  to  tov  Myov. 


366 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


rhetorician,  this  man  had  come  to  Rome  from  his  birthplace 
Prusa,  and  had  attached  himself  to  a distinguished  person- 
age, possibly  to  Flavius  Clemens,  in  whose  fall  he  became 
himself  involved.  Domitian  threatened  him  with  death,  and 
he  fled,  taking  with  him,  by  the  advice  of  the  Delphic  oracle, 
only  two  books,  one  of  Plato  and  one  of  Demosthenes.1  Pie 
’retired  to  a Grecian  colony  on  the  frontier  of  the  empire ; but 
even  amid  the  marshes  of  the  Get*  he  deemed  it  prudent  to 
forego  his  real  name,  and  disguise  himself  in  rags,  and  some- 
times apparently  to  plunge  into  deeper  concealment  on  the 
banks  of  the  Borysthenes.  At  the  moment,  however,  of 
Domitian’s  death,  Dion  was  in  the  neighbourhood  of  a Ro- 
man encampment  on  the  Danube,  and  here,  when  the  soldiers 
resented  their  emperor’s  assassination  and  murmured  at  the 
reported  accession  of  1ST erva,  he  harangued  them  with  irresist- 
ible eloquence,  and  secured  their  adhesion  to  the  elect  of  the 
senate.3  1ST erva  received  him  with  open  arms.  Under  this 
prince  and  his  successor  he  recovered  more  than  his  former 
estimation,  and  became  a prime  favourite  with  Trajan,  who 
often  invited  him  to  his  table,  and  carried  him  in  his  chariot, 
and  was  wont,  according  to  the  story,  to  reply  to  his  most 
charming  discourses,  I admire  you  exceedingly , hut  I don't, 
pretend  to  understand  a word  you  say.  It  would  seem  that 
in  the  haunts  of  civilized  and  educated  men,  the  common- 
places of  philosophy,  with  which  the  sophist  was  abundantly 
furnished,  passed  current  for  wisdom  and  truth ; but  it  was 
among  the  ruder  sons  of  nature  on  the  borders  of  the  Scythian 
wilderness  that,  on  being  earnestly  questioned,  the  emptiness 
of  such  rhetorical  flourishes  flashed  upon  him,  and  he  set 
himself  to  examine  his  own  conscience  and  spiritual  belief. 
The  result  was  the  abandonment  of  the  word-war  of  the  dog- 

Dion  Chrys.  Oral.  xiii.  xlvi.  The  terms  in  which  he  speaks  of  the  patron 
with  whom  he  was  involved  are  remarkable,  and  seem  to  indicate  that  it  was  a 
case  of  suifering  for  opinion : Sia  ravra  cnrodavivTog  Si’  a iroXlolg  nal  ax^Sbv 
naaiv  kSdiiei  paicapiop. 

a Philostr.  1.  c.  who  quotes  from  Homer : avrap  6 yvpvltdrj  paneoxv  noXlpr/ni 
'0  Suaaevc. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


sfiv 


matists,  and  the  embrace  of  the  simple  morality  of  Socrates, 
as  the  only  man  among  the  ancients  whose  homely  sense 
could  grapple  with  the  problems  of  human  nature,  or  satisfy 
the  inquiries  of  an  awakened  intelligence.1  The  effect  of  this 
discovery  upon  the  pagan  philosopher  may  be  likened  to  that 
of  religious  conversion  on  the  Christian  disciple.  Henceforth 
Dion  devoted  himself  to  the  practice  of  virtue,  and  preached 
the  duties  which  he  practised.  He  expounded  not  the  met- 
aphysics of  Zeno  or  Epicurus,  but  their  moral  maxims ; dif- 
fused the  knowledge  of  divine  law  and  Providence,  taug-ht 
moderation  to  the  haughty,  patience  to  the  impetuous,  resig- 
nation to  the  afflicted.  To  Trajan  on  the  throne  he  set  forth 
the  beauty  of  justice  and  the  true  dignity  of  power;  to  the 
turbulent  mobs  of  the  Italian  cities  he  showed  how  the  order 
of  nature,  the  appointed  course  of  the  sun  and  stars,  might 
enforce  the  duty  of  obedience ; the  fantastic  and  drunken 
crowds  of  Alexandria  he  rebuked  for  their  levity  and  intem- 
perance ; he  startled  the  vanity  of  the  Athenians  by  expos- 
ing the  worthlessness  of  their  rhetoric  and  sophistics.  He 
illustrated  with  sense  and  humanity  the  well-known  paradox 
of  the  Stoics  that  the  good  man  alone  is  free,  and  used  it  as 
a text  for  preaching  forbearance  towards  the  slave.2  Dion 
and  others  like  him  have  been  called  the  popular  preachers 
of  natural  religion,  and  the  improved  tone  of  society  at  this 
period,  of  which  we  have  discovered  many  traces,  may  in 
part  be  justly  ascribed  to  the  religious  enthusiasm  with  which 
they  discharged  their  self-appointed  office.  The  name  of 
Chrysostom  may  have  already  reminded  us  of  the  most  illus- 
trious of  the  ancient  Christian  orators,  and  his  speeches,  of 
which  a large  number  are  preserved,  may  be  compared,  with 
little  disadvantage,  with  the  sermons  of  the  bishop  of  Con- 
stantinople, for  their  warm  appeals  both  to  the  heart  and  the 
conscience  of  their  hearers.3 

1 Dion  Chrys.  Oral.  xiii. 

’ Dion  Chrys.  Orat.  xiv.  p.  233.;  xv.  p.  238,  foil.  See  IVallon,  VEsclavaga 
dam  VAnliquile,  ill.  34. 

3 Dion  Chrysostom  is  well  described,  and  not  perhaps  too  highly  estimated, 
by  M.  Martha,  in  the  Revue  Conicmporaine , Paris,  lSoI. 


368 


HISTORY  01'  THE  ROMANS 


But  the  foundation  of  morality,  as  laid  by  the  sophists, 
could  rest  only  on  the  judgments  of  the  conscience,  and  its 
m dim  and  fluctuating  ideas  of  goodness  and  holi- 

The  Christian  & & 

teachers  and  ness.  At  Athens,  as  elsewhere  throughout  the 

apologists.  . 

empire,  there  were  other  teachers  at  work  who 
pleaded  the  direct  constraint  of  authoritative  dogmas. 
They  appealed  at  once  to  men’s  hopes  and  fears,  by  the  doc- 
trine of  a resurrection  and  a future  retribution.  This  was 
the  creed  preached  of  old  on  Mars’s  hill  by  Saul  of  Tarsus, 
as  the  divine  complement  to  the  ethics  of  Zeno  and  Epicurus. 
This  was  the  keystone  required  to  bind  together  the  broad 
arch  of  principles  which  spannc  3 the  duties  of  mankind.  In 
Athens,  the  home  of  argument  and  logic,  the  faith  of  Christ 
could  not  be  propounded  as  a bare  ceremonial  law;  it  must 
be  set  forth  as  a metaphysical  creed  ; and  as  such  it  attracted 
some  at  least  among  the  philosophers  themselves,  and  carried 
off  men  of  learning  and  acumen  from  the  shadowy  illusions 
of  the  Lyceum  and  the  Academy.  The  Christian  apologists 
of  the  second  century,  such  as  Justin  and  others,  converts 
themselves  from  the  Gentile  philosophy,  excited  the  interest 
and  admiration  of  their  hearers  by  plunging  them  into  the 
mysteries  of  their  new  faith,  and  especially  the  deejrest  of  all 
mysteries,  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  If  the  wisdom  of  the 
world  was  repelled  by  the  story  of  Christ’s  humiliation  and 
sufferings,  it  wras  attracted,  on  the  other  hand,  by  the  prom- 
ise revealed  at  his  resurrection,  and  this  cardinal  dogma  be- 
came the  stronghold  of  the  new  faith  in  its  contests  with  the 


Gentile  moralists.  The  presence  of  the  emperor  in  Athens, 
and  the  curiosity  with  which  he  surveyed  all  the  conflicts  of 
human  opinion,  encouraged  the  Christian  teachers  to  address 
him  as  a truth-seeker  himself,  and  to  defend  their  own  bold 
and  novel  creed  against  the  reasonings,  the  sneers,  and  the 
violence  of  their  antagonists.  Though  devoted  from  early 
habit  to  the  ancient  formulas  of  Grecian  wisdom,  and  generally 
content  to  roam  from  the  halls  of  one  familiar  teacher  to 
those  of  another,  Hadrian  was  nevertheless  inquisitive  and 
restless  by  nature,  and  the  vague  aspirations  suggested  to 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


369 


him  at  his  initiation  into  the  mysteries  at  Eleusis, — for  he  had 
pried  into  the  deepest  mysteries  of  the  heathen 

1 . Hadrian  s toler- 

world, — could  not  fail  to  arouse  him  to  the  preten-  ation  of  the 
• n -i  . . , n - , , Christian  faith. 

sions  ot  a creed  which  was  founded  directly  on 
the  doctrine  of  Immortality.1  It  must  be  remembered,  more- 
over, that  Christianity,  which  even  at  Rome  assumed  to  un- 
instructed eyes  the  appearance  of  a Greek  speculation,  at 
Athens,  the  very  centre  of  Greece,  seemed  to  emanate  directly 
from  the  schools.  Accordingly  Hadrian  listened  graciously 
to  the  apologies  of  Quadratus  and  Aristides,  who  appeared 
perhaps  before  him  in  the  actual  garb  of  philosophers ; 3 and 
the  mildness  he  exercised  towards  the  believers  may  not  un- 
reasonably be  ascribed  to  the  influence  of  their  reputed  learn- 
ing and  wisdom.3 


1 Spartian,  Hadr.  13. ; Euseb.  Chron.  a.  122.  This  emperor’s  curiosity, 
particularly  in  religious  matters,  is  affirmed  by  a consensus  of  authority.  Ter- 
tullian,  Apol.  5. : “ curiositatum  omnium  explorator.”  Euseb.  Hist.  Eccl.  v.  5. : 
navra  ra  irspiepya  TioXvKpaypovcyv.  Julian,  in  Ccesar. : no'hj'Kpayp.ovuv  rd 
aKdpprjTa.  Like  many  of  the  Romans  he  demeaned  himself  very  differently  in 
Rome  and  in  the  provinces  ; hence  it  could  be  said  of  him  at  Rome,  notwith- 
standing the  character  he  then  bore  abroad : “ sacra  Romana  diligentissime  cu- 
ravit,  peregrina  contempsit.” 

2 Justin  the  Martyr,  whose  apologies  were  addressed  to  Hadrian’s  succes- 
sors, expressly  states  of  himself  that  he  continued  after  his  conversion  to  wear 
the  philosopher’s  habit.  (Dial,  cum  Tryph.  init.)  Aristides  was  also  a con- 
vert from  the  heathen  philosophy,  but  the  same,  however  probable,  cannot  be 
said  with  confidence  of  Quadratus,  who  is  only  known  to  us  as  the  bishop  of 
Athens.  See  Euseb.  Hist.  Eccles.  iv.  23.  S.  Hieron.  De  Vir.  illustr.  1 9,  20. 
The  only  existing  fragment  of  Quadratus  asserts  in  the  boldest  manner  the 
miracles  of  resurrection:  ol  i S-epairevdevreg,  oi  avaoravreg  hi  venporv.  Compare 
Routh,  Reliq.  Sacr.  i.  '71.  Milman,  Hist,  of  Christianity,  ii.  153.  note. 

3 From  Justin  Martyr,  Apol.  1.  66.,  and  Euseb.  H.  E.  iv.  8,  9.,  we  learn 
that  Hadrian,  in  answer  to  Minucius  Fundanus,  prefect  of  Asia,  directed  him  to 
keep  strictly  to  the  law  in  his  treatment  of  the  Christians,  and  not  to  yield  to 
popular  clamour  against  them.  It  would  seem  that  since  Trajan’s  rescript  the 
law  had  shaped  itself  into  a more  definite  form ; still  the  mode  and  extent  of 
executing  it  appears  to  have  been  left  generally  to  the  discretion  of  the  local 
authorities.  It  is  strange,  however,  and  shows  how  little  we  really  know  of  the 
Roman  procedure,  to  find  the  Christian  apologist  Melito  addressing  Hadrian’s 
successors  with  the  assertion  that  the  persecution  of  the  disciples  in  Asia  in 


•570 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


But  Athens  was  on  the  whole  the  great  conservative 
University  of  the  Roman  world,  and  the  noble  youths  who 
„ flocked  to  it  for  the  teaching  of  the  sophists,  im 

Hadrian  dis-  . . 

satisfied  with  bibed  a c on  vie  t ion  that  the  whole  circle  of  leam- 
the  conserra-  . . 

tive  spirit  of  mg  nad  been  there  described,  and  no  further  dis- 
Athens.  ° . . , . ’ . 

covenes  m ethics  or  metaphysics  remained  to 
reward  industry  or  genius.  At  Athens  the  spirit  of  inquiry 
was  restrained  by  the  influence  of  great  names  and  long  re- 
vered associations.  Thence  the  student  returned  to  Rome 
with  his  ears  closed  against  all  novel  opinions,  full  of  en- 
thusiasm for  the  past,  satisfied  with  the  assurance  that  the 
existing  generation,  if  there  was  no  new  truth  for  it  to  dis- 
cover, was  blest  in  the  enjoyment  of  the  accumulated  discov- 
eries of  ages.  Though  bred  himself  in  the  school  of  self- 
complacency,  and  fitted  by  his  powers  of  acquisition  to 
master  all  the  knowledge  which  Athens  had  stamped  with 
her  sanction,  Hadrian  was  not  so  easily  contented.  From 
temper,  from  experience,  and  from  the  freshness  of  intellect 
which  he  nourished  by  constant  movement,  he  still  retained 
an  interest  in  every  pretension  to  novelty,  and  traced  with 
undiminished  zest  all  the  eccentricities  of  the  human  mind.’ 
He  crossed  over  from  Athens  to  Alexandria,  and 

He  crosses  over 

to  Alexandria,  there  a new  scene  opened  upon  him.  The  Egyp- 
A d 130  131  A x o •/  l 

tian  capital  bore,  like  that  of  Greece,  the  charac- 
ter of  a University.  Thither  also  the  youth  of  every  province 
flocked  to  attend  the  lectures  of  another  tribe  of  sophists ; 

his  time  is  something  quite  new : to  yap  ovi 5e  tt&kote  yevdftsvov  vvv  difi/cerai  rb 
tuv  dEoaefifov  ybog  naivoig  iXawb/uvov  Sbyp-aai  Kara  Tijv  'Ao'iav.  Euseb.  Heel. 
Hist.  iv.  26. 

1 It  was  from  his  own  love  of  eccentricity  that  he  pretended  to  prefer  Cato 
to  Cicero,  Ennius  to  Virgil,  Antimachus  to  Homer.  Spartian,  Hadr.  16.  In 
compliment  to  this  fancy  an  Alexandrian  poet  composed  24  books  of  a work  to 
which  he  gave  the  name  of  Anti-Homerus.  Orion  ventured  on  the  tour  de  force 
of  haranguing  him  in  a Latin  panegyric,  a task  to  which  few  Greeks  would 
have  been  equal.  Hadrian  repaid  these  flatteries  by  writing  a long  poem  in 
Greek,  in  praise  of  Alexandria  and  its  founder.  “ Cum  his  professoribus  et 
philosophis  libris  vel  carminibus  invicem  editis  srepe  certavit.”  Spartian,  c.  16. 
Hadrian’s  visit  to  Alexandria  may  be  dated  a.  d.  130,  131.  Gregorovius,  p.  ?9 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


371 


and  there  too  professors  of  every  science  were  maintained  at 
the  public  expense,  or  by  endowments  which  had  existed 
from  the  era  of  the  Ptolemies.  The  academic  Liberal  and  in 
life  of  Alexandria,  such  as  it  had  already  con-  ^araotTr  of 
tinued  for  four  centuries,  was  cast  nearly  in  the  a'rf;in 'uniVer- 
type  with  which  our  modern  ideas  are  most  sit^- 
familiar.  The  Museum  was  an  assemblage  of  lecture  rooms, 
} rivate  chambers,  common  halls,  and  libraries,  in  which  the 
professors  dined,  studied  and  disputed  together,  the  envy 
and  admiration  of  a hundred  generations  of  pupils.1  The 
Brucheum  was  a similar  institution  affiliated  to  the  Museum. 
The  emperor  Claudius  had  endowed  a separate  college  in 
which  his  own  histories  were  appointed  to  form  a substantial 
part  of  the  course  of  instruction.  The  Temple  of  Serapis 
accommodated  the  remains  of  the  Ptolemsean  library  which 
had  escaped  from  Caesar’s  fire.  There  it  continued  to  receive 
large  additions,  which  made  it  once  more,  in  the  decline  of 
the  empire,  the  great  storehouse  of  ancient  learning.  But 
Alexandria  was  the  University  of  progress.  Though  the 
city  of  the  great  Macedonian  had  now  existed  for  near  five 
hundred  years,  its  ripe  age  was  not  encircled  with  the  antique 
associations  which  rendered  Athens  peculiarly  venerable. 
Alexandria  had  no  mythology  and  no  legendary  poetry.  She 
had  not  grown  through  the  obscurity  of  immemorial  ages ; 
she  was  a creation  of  historic  times.  Prom  the  first  her 
career  had  been  marked  out  for  her  by  the  fiat  of  her  found- 
er; she  had  been  devoted  originally  to  the  material  pursuits 
of  commerce ; and  now  in  her  maturity,  she  was  an  empo- 
rium for  the  interchange  of  ideas  and  speculations  along 
with  the  products  of  various  climes  and  industries.  Alexan 
dria  was  accustomed  to  welcome  novelty  in  thought  as  wel 
as  in  arts  and  manufactures.  With  her  discovery  was  at  a 
premium ; and  even  ethics  and  metaphysics  had  their  ex- 

Strabo,  xvii.  1.  Philostr.  YU.  Sophist,  i.  22.  Ammian.  Marcell.  xxii.  16. : 
“ diutumum  prsestantium  hominum  domieilium.”  For  the  public  libraries  of 
Athens  and  Alexandria  see  A.  Gellius,  vi.  17.  There  is  a full  account  of  Alex 
andria,  the  Serapeum,  the  Brucheum,  the  libraries,  &c.,  in  Ammianus,  1.  c. 


372 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


changeable  value  among  the  curious  of  all  nations,  who  met 
at  the  junction  of  three  continents ; for  her  ships  were  the 
feelers  with  which  she  touched  on  Greece  and  Italy,  while 
her  site  was  debateable  land  between  Africa  and  Asia.1 2 
Through  Alexandria  ran  the  current  of  Eastern  thought 
which  now  set  most  strongly  westward.  The  Greek  philoso- 
phy domiciled  in  the  capital  of  the  Ptolemies  was  stirred  to 
its  depths  by  converging  streams  from  Syria,  Persia  and 
India.  Judaism  and  Christianity  were  established  side  by 
side  with  the  gross  idolatry  of  the  Copts,  and  the  elemental 
worship  of  the  Sabseans.  The  fantastic  theosophy  of  the 
Gnostics,  of  which  the  local  and  the  spiritual  filiation  are 
equally  unknown  to  us,  exercised  an  unacknowledged  influ- 
ence Avlierever  the  human  mind  was  deeply  moved  by  the 
problems  of  man’s  relation  to  the  Deity.  Into  this  new  world 
of  conflicting  opinions  Hadrian  threw  himself  with  vehemence 
and  ardour.  He  made  himself  at  home  in  the  discussions  of 
the  Alexandrian  schools,  and  was  more  entertained  than  en- 
lightened by  the  wayward  imaginations  which  they  paraded 
before  him.  The  impression  made  upon  him  is  discovered 
from  a letter  in  which  he  describes  to  Servianus  the  intellec- 
tual aspect  of  the  place.3  I am  now  become  f ully  acquainted , 
he  says,  with  that  Egypt  tohich  you  extol  so  highly.  I have 
found  the  people  vain,  fickle  and  shifting  with  every  breath 

1 The  isthmus  of  Suez  or  the  stream  of  the  Nile  has  generally  been  speci- 
fied as  the  boundary  of  the  two  continents : but  in  Caesar’s  time  the  line  of  de- 
markation  was  supposed  popularly  to  run  through  the  centre  of  the  city  of 
Alexandria.  De  Bell.  Alex.  14. : predicant  partem  esse  Alexandria  dimidiam 
Afriese.” 

2 The  genuineness  of  the  letter  may  be  questioned  on  the  ground  of  Yerus 
being  mentioned  as  Hadrian’s  son.  It  would  appear  from  Spartian  that  this 
prince  was  not  adopted  till  the  year  135.  On  the  other  hand,  it  is  not  abso- 
lutely necessary  to  conclude  that  the  letter  was  written  from  Alexandria  at  the 
time  of  Hadrian’s  visit  in  131.  But  the  importance  attached  to  the  Christians 
and  the  interest  shown  in  them,  not  to  mention  the  premature  degeneracy  im- 
puted to  them,  seem  to  me  to  throw  much  doubt  upon  it.  The  letter  is  not  re- 
corded by  Hadrian’s  biographer  Spartianus,  but  occurs  incidentally  in  the  life 

of  a later  emperor  by  Vopiscus.  Vit.  Katurnin  c.  8. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


373 


of  opinion.  Those  who  worship  Serapis  are  in  fact  Chris- 
tians • and  they  who  call  themselves  Christian  bishops  are 
actually  worshippers  of  Serapis.  There  is  no  chief  of  a Jew- 
ish synagogue , no  Samaritan , no  Christian  bishop , who  is 
not  an  astrologer , a fortune-teller  and  a conjuror.  The  patri- 
arch himself , when  he  comes  to  Egypt , is  compelled  by  one 
party  to  worship  Serapis , by  the  other  Christ.  Then,  after  a 
digression  on  the  husy  and  restless  character  of  the  people, 
he  continues : They  have  but  one  Cod  (alluding  to  their  idol- 
atry of  lucre) — him  Christians , Jews  and  Gentiles  worship 
all  alike f The  ardour  of  the  Alexandrians  in  the  pursuit  of 
wealth  is  thus  pungently  satirized,  and  we  can  understand 
how  the  bustle  of  a great  commercial  emporium  would  sur- 
prise  an  observer  accustomed  to  the  dignified  somnolence  of 
an  old-fashioned  city  like  Athens ; but  the  sneer  thus  loosely 
hazarded  against  the  opinions  current  among  them  may  re- 
quire some  closer  consideration. 

It  must  strike  us  with  surprise  that  the  philosophic  em- 
peror, a smatterer  in  all  knowledge,  and  a spy  upon  all  opin- 
ions, should  direct  his  remarks,  not  to  the  state 
of  Gentile  philosophy,  but  to  that  of  Jewish  and 
Christian  belief.  Possibly,  if  we  knew  the  oc- 
casion of  this  letter,  which,  from  certain  allusions 
it  contains,  must  belong  to  a date  some  years 
Hadrian’s  actual  visit,  the  explanation  of  this  circumstance 
might  be  more  apparent ; but  taking  the  document  as  it  lies 


Interest  taken 
by  Hadrian  in 
the  dogmatic 
teaching  of  the 
Jews  and 
Christians. 

later  than 


1 Such  is  the  explanation  usually  given  of  this  allusion  to  the  One  God  ; 
according  to  the  reading:  “unus  illis  deus  est.  Hunc  Christiani,”  &c.  See 
Milman,  Hist,  of  Christianity,  ii.  156.  But  the  passage  is  probably  corrupt. 

One  MS.  gives:  “unus  illis  deus  nullus  est.  Hunc,”  &c.,  which  Mr.  Sharpe, 

Hist,  of  Egypt,  ii.  168.,  follows,  rendering  it:  “Their  one  God  is  nothing. 
Christians,  Jews  and  all  nations  worship  him  ; ” referring  to  the  prevalent  mono- 

theism among  the  Oriental  sects  at  Alexandria.  Serapis  combined  more  than 
one  divinity  in  his  own  person : "H/Uof, 1 * * * * *  7Qpog,  '0 oipig,  ’Aval;,  AWvvoog,  ’A -6A. 

Ton.  Euseb.  Prcep.  Evang.  iii.  15,  16.:  “Hence  arose  the  opinion  which 

seems  to  have  been  given  to  Hadrian,  that  the  Egyptians  had  only  one  God, 
and  his  mistake  in  thinking  that  the  worshippers  of  Serapis  were  Christians.* 

Sharpe,  Hist,  of  Egypt,  ii.  168. 


374 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.D.  181. 


before  us,  we  must  conclude  tliat  the  phenomena  of  Judaism 
and  Christianity  constituted,  even  at  this  period,  the  most 
salient  features  of  the  intellectual  movement  at  Alexandria. 
The  sophists  of  the  Museum,  whether  standing  on  the  old 
ways,  and  proclaiming  the  tenets  of  the  old  Greek  philoso- 
phy, or  whether  busied  in  contriving  the  eclectic  system 
which  has  assumed  a place  in  mental  history  under  the  name 
of  the  New  Platonism,  attracted  less  remark  from  a curious 
but  intelligent  observer,  than  the  professors  of  a religious 
doctrine,  Jewish  or  Christian.  Hadrian,  indeed,  cosmopolite 
though  he  was  in  tastes  and  habits,  could  not  transcend  the 
limits  prescribed  by  his  birth  and  training.  He  discovered 
in  the  views  of  the  Alexandrians  a tendency  to  Oriental,  and 
even  to  Jewish  ideas,  which  revolted  rather  than  attracted 
him.  The  Gnostic  theories  of  the  Divine  Nature  with  which 
they  were  impregnated  would  be  to  him  strange  and  prepos- 
terous, while  the  seriousness  they  affected,  and  the  positive 
belief  they  required,  would  be  felt  as  a burden  by  one  who 
was  accustomed  to  regard  all  philosophy  as  a mere  playing 
with  truth.  Hadrian,  however,  mingled  freely  with  the 
sages  and  professors  of  the  Egyptian  capital ; he  conversed, 
debated,  and  banqueted  with  them;  accepted  from  them  the 
same  flattery,  and  dispensed  to  them  in  return  the  same  lib- 
erality which  had  marked  his  intercourse  with  the  rival  uni- 
versity. Here,  too,  he  increased  the  salaries  of  the  public 
teachers,  and  encouraged  the  youth  of  the  empire  to  make 
literature  their  business.  We  may  believe  that  he  extended 
his  protection  to  the  preachers  of  Christianity  also,  and  helped 
to  raise  them  to  the  high  place  they  long  held  among  the 
learned  at  Alexandria.  The  praises  of  the  early  Church  were 
not  ill  bestowed  on  the  prince  to  whom  we  may  thus  be  in- 
debted for  the  liberal  piety  of  Clement  and  Origen.  Here, 
as  at  Athens,  he  left  abundant  tokens  of  his  munificence,  in 
the  erection  of  useful  and  noble  buildings,  and  in  the  recon- 
struction of  a quarter  of  the  city.  But  the  mob  of  Alexan- 
dria had  been  always  notorious  for  turbulence  and  indocility. 
The  fanaticism  of  the  Coptic  race  was  here  stimulated  bx 


A.O  884.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


375 


political  jealousy.  In  the  rural  districts  a dispute  about  the 
genuineness  of  an  Apis  had  recently  goaded  it  to  bloody  con- 
flict, and  the  religious  dissensions  of  Ombi  and  Tentyra  had 
been  polluted  by  actual  cannibalism.1  In  the  city,  however, 
the  rivalry  of  the  Copts  and  J ews,  together  with  their  mutual 
hatred  of  the  dominant  Greek  race,  had  engendered  chronic 
disaffection  and  resistance  to  all  legal  authority.  In  vain  had 
the  Roman  government  forbidden  its  citizens  to  reside  in 
Egypt,  and  excite  by  their  arrogance  or  cupidity  the  suscep- 
tibilities of  the  native  population.  In  vain  was  the  independ- 
ence of  the  proudest  of  cities  more  tenderly  handled  than 
that  of  any  other  in  the  empire.  The  rabble  of  the  streets, 
who  controlled  the  local  administration,  despised  every  title 
or  dignity : they  insulted  the  emperor  himself  as  recklessly 
as  they  would  have  hooted  a Greek  sophist  or  a Jewish  rabbi. 
When  Hadrian’s  favourite  Antinous  was  drowned  Beath  of  Ha_ 
in  the  Nile,  a misfortune  with  which  all  the  world  ^“ntuious1" 
that  pretended  to  self-respect  affected  a decent  A-  “• 131- 
sympathy,  the  Alexandrians  alone  made  a mock  of  their 
ruler’s  weakness,  and  the  letter  above  cited  seems  to  have 
been  written  under  the  actual  smart  of  their  unfeeling  ribald- 
ry.2 r have  given  these  people , Hadrian  said,  everything 

1 Spa  .-tianus,  Hadr.  12.,  refers  to  a riot  at  Alexandria  on  the  subject  of  the 
Apis : “ Alexandrina  seditione  turbatus,  quse  nata  est  ob  Apin,  qui  cum  reper- 
tus  essot  post  multos  annos  turbas  inter  populos  creavit,  apud  quem  deberet  lo- 
cari  omnibus  studiose  certantibus.”  The  best  account  of  the  Apis  is  in  Am- 
mian.  Mf.rcell.  xxii.  14.  Of  the  respect  with  which  Hadrian  would  affect  to 
approach  the  subject  we  may  surmise  from  what  has  been  already  said  of  him. 
A ugustns  had  treated  the  bull-god  with  contempt;  earlier  emperors  had  wan- 
tonly slain  him.  But  Germanieus  consulted  his  oracle,  and  Titus  had  paid  him 
horour.  The  bloody  quarrel  of  Ombi  and  Tentyra  is  the  theme  of  Juvenal’s 
Sat  xv.,  and  is  referred  with  most  probability  to  the  year  119,  the  third  of 
Hadrian,  from  the  words,  “ quae  nuper  consule  Junio,”  xv.  27. 

a Dion,  lxix.  11. ; Spartian,  Hadr.  14.  Hadrian  seems  to  have  said  that 
Antinous  fell  by  accident  into  the  water.  Other  accounts,  however,  asserted 
that  he  drowned  himself  voluntarily  in  obedience  to  an  oracle  which  demanded, 
for  the  life  of  the  emperor,  the  sacrifice  of  the  object  dearest  to  him.  How- 
ever this  may  be,  Hadrian  lamented  his  death  with  extravagant  weakness,  pro- 
claimed his  divinity  to  the  jeering  Egyptians,  and  consecrated  a temple  iD  his 


376 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  131. 


they  ashed for.  I have  confirmed  all  their  ancient  privileges, 
and  added  new , which  they  could  not  help  acknowledging  in 
my  presence.  But  no  sooner  had  I turned  my  bach  than  they 
lavished  every  hind  of  insult  on  my  son  Vents , and  my 
friend  Antinous.  I wish  them  no  worse , lie  added  in  his 
bantering  tone,  than  that  they  should  feed  on  their  own 
chickens  / and  how  foully  they  hatch  them  I am  ashamed  to 
say.' 

The  character  of  the  Alexandrians  is  painted  in  one  of  the 
most  interesting  of  Dion’s  orations,  which  is  also  curious  as  a 
specimen  of  the  lay-preaching  of  a converted 

Ingratitude  of  f . . J f ° 

the  Aiexan-  rhetorician,  and  of  the  extent  to  which  freedom 
of  speech  was  allowed  in  lashing  the  follies  of 
the  sovereign  people.2  The  sophist’s  charges  against  them 
relate  to  their  vanity  and  frivolity,  their  extravagant  devo- 
tion to  public  amusements,  singing,  playing,  and  racing,  and 
also  to  the  bloody  conflicts  in  which  their  amusements  too 
often  resulted.  But  Dion  visited  Alexandria  before  the  time 
of  Hadrian,  and  could  not  resent  as  it  deserved  the  ingrati- 
tude the  people  manifested  towards  a gracious  prince,  from 
whom,  though  parts  of  his  conduct  might  provoke  a smile, 
they  had  experienced  only  unmerited  kindness.  Hadrian  did 
not  condescend  to  take  vengeance  on  his  persecutors : two 

honour.  He  gave  the  name  of  Besantinoopolis  to  the  city  in  which  he  was 
worshipped  in  conjunction  with  an  obscure  divinity  named  Besa.  Deification 
in  Egypt  assumed  the  form  of  identification  with  a recognised  divinity.  Ori- 
gen,  cont.  Celsum,  iii. ; Euseb.  Hist.  Heel.  iv.  8.;  Sharpe,  Hist,  figypt,  ii.  161. 
The  late  discoveries  in  hieroglyphics  have  shown  that  the  obelisk  on  the  Monte 
Pincio  at  Rome  was  dedicated  to  the  memory  of  Antinous  in  the  joint  names 
of  Hadrian  and  Sabina.  Smyth,  Roman  Medals , p.  110. 

1 Vopiscus,  1.  c. : “ quos  quemadmodum  foecundant  pudet  dicere.”  Aris- 
totle had  not  shrunk  from  mentioning  how  the  Egyptians  hatched  their  fowls’ 
eggs  in  dung.  Casaubon,  in  loc.  Besides  the  apparent  anachronism  of  the 
allusion  to  Yerus,  it  may  be  said  that  neither  the  matter  nor  the  style  of  this 
letter  is  such  as  we  should  expect  from  an  imperial  correspondent.  Yopiscus 
professes  to  take  it  from  the  volumes  of  Phlegon,  a freedman  of  Hadrian. 

2 Dion  Chrys.  Oral,  xxxii.  Ammian.  Marcell.  xxii.  6.  speaks  more  particu- 
larly of  their  litigious  and  quarrelsome  temper : “ iEgyptii  genus  hominum 
controversum,  et  assuetudine  perplexius  litigandi  semper  laetissimum,”  etc. 


A U.  884.] 


UNDER  TEE  EMPIRE. 


377 


generations  later  an  emperor  of  a different  stamp  washed  out 
indignities  not  more  crying  in  a sanguinary  massacre.1  The 
mild  philosopher  who  now  commanded  the  thirty  legions 
shook  off  the  dust  of  the  turbid  city  from  his  feet,  and  made 
a pilgrimage,  as  a peaceful  antiquarian,  to  the  wonders  of  old 
Thebes.  The  name  of  Hadrian  does  not  now  appear  among 
the  rude  inscriptions  which  can  be  still  decyphered  on  the 
Egyptian  monuments ; but  some  Greek  lines  scratched  on 
the  legs  of  the  broken  statue  of  Memnon,  show  that  Sabina, 
at  least,  visited  that  mysterious  fragment,  and  heard  the 
music  which  issued  from  it  at  sunrise.2  Hadrian  ascended 
likewise  the  Casian  Mount,  crowned  with  a celebrated  temple 
of  Jupiter,  and  restored  the  chapel  of  Pompeius  at  its  foot, 
which  had  been  recently  overthrown  by  the  Jews.  His  taste 
and  piety  were  further  attested  by  a short  and  pithy  epigram 
on  the  uncertainty  of  fortune,  which  he  caused  to  be  in- 
scribed upon  it.3 

If  Hadrian  was  dissatisfied  with  the  people  of  Alexandria, 
he  was  disgusted  and  incensed  with  the  inhabitants  of  Anti- 

1 Herodian,  iv.  16,  17. 

a Tlie  inscription  is  given  by  Eckbel,  vi.  490.,  and  many  others  : 

'E ichiov  avdjjcavrog  h/oi  UonXioe  ~Ba?ipivog 
Qcivac;  rdf  Beiag  Mquiwof  fj  ia/ievotp : k.  t.  X. 

The  date,  which  is  specified  in  it,  may  be  fixed  to  131  or  even  130,  quite  at  the 
commencement  of  Hadrian’s  residence  in  Egypt,  if  not  a little  before  his  arri- 
val. The  statue  was  at  this  time  lying  in  fragments,  and  the  sounds  were  sup- 
posed to  issue  from  the  broken  pieces.  Hr.  Sharpe  • considers  the  marvel  a 
direct  imposture.  For  the  fondness  of  the  Romans  for  visiting  antiquities, 
which  has  been  referred  to  before,  see  Epictetus,  Dissert,  i.  6. : elf  ’0 Avp-rriav 
(iiv  aTrodyueiTS,  iv  eidi/re  to  epyov  tov  feithou,  mi  aTVX7/ua  inacrog  v/xav  oierai 
to  avioTdpTjTog  tovtgtv  cmodaveiv. 

3 Dion,  lxix.  11. : “r<p  vaoig  PpWovri  tt6gi]  GTravig  sr-Hero  Tvpflov.  Comp. 
Spartian,  Hadr.  14. : Appian,  Bell.  Civ.  ii.  96.  The  historian,  or  his  epitomizer, 
brings  Hadrian  from  Greece,  through  Judea  to  Mount  Casius,  on  his  way  into 
Egypt.  I suppose  him,  on  the  contrary,  to  have  entered  Judea  from  Egypt, 
where  he  promulgated  the  decrees  which  produced  the  Jewish  insurrection  in 
132.  But  the  exact  sequence  of  his  movements  must  be  considered  as  very 
ancertain. 


3/8 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  132. 


Hadrian  visits  och.  This  city,  the  third  in  population  and  im- 
dissuste/^wHh3  portance  of  the  empire,  the  capital  of  the  once 
voiuptuous-and  powerful  kings  of  Syria,  and  honoured  for  now 
ness-  nearly  two  centuries  by  the  residence  of  the  Ro- 

man proconsul,  who  approached  nearest  in  rank  and  power 
to  the  emperor  himself,  was  abandoned,  beyond  any  of  the 
great  centres  of  wealth  and  luxury,  to  the  indolent  enjoy- 
ment of  voluptuous  ease.  The  Antiochians  made  no  preten- 
sions to  learning  or  philosophy,  but  they  were  addicted  to 
vile  and  vicious  superstitions,  in  which  the  simple  ideas  of  a 
remote  antiquity  were  corrupted  into  gross  licentiousness, 
and  deformed  by  the  impurest  orgies.  Placed  in  the  centre 
of  a rich  and  populous  region,  and  on  the  highway  which 
united  the  East  and  West  with  the  South,  they  offered  a 
mart  for  the  productions  of  many  realms,  and  their  city  was 
the  resort  of  traders  as  well  as  idlers  from  the  three  conti- 
nents. The  unrivalled  beauty  of  its  situation,  a fertile  plain 
watered  by  an  abundant  river',  visited  by  breezes  from  the 
sea  at  fifteen  miles’  distance,  and  sheltered  from  fiercer  winds 
by  a lofty  table  mountain  in  its  rear,  presented  an  alluring 
place  of  residence,  and  made  Antioch  the  favourite  retreat  of 
the  idle  and  self-indulgent.  The  attractions  of  its  suburb, 
named  Daphne  from  the  laurel  groves  which  encircled  the 
fane  of  Apollo,  were  famous  throughout  the  West,  and  often 
proved  the  Capua  of  the  Roman  legions.  The  remoteness  of 
this  Eastern  capital  from  Rome,  and  the  fatal  though  un- 
avoidable policy,  by  which  the  legionaries  and  their  chiefs, 
together  with  the  concoiu-se  of  the  prefect’s  civil  attendants, 
were  suffered  to  remain  for  many  years  together  in  so  luxu- 
rious a banishment,  emboldened  the  Italians  to  east  off  the 
restraints  of  national  decorum,  and  yield  to  the  fascinations 
of  the  Syi'ian  Circe,  who  flouted  the  austere  habits  of  the 
West  with  keen-edged  satire  or  boisterous  ridicule.  Again 
and  again  the  emperors  called  them  to  arms  to  chastise  the 
Jew,  to  protect  the  Armenian,  or  to  threaten  the  Parthian  ; 
but  every  interval  of  tranquillity  relaxed  the  bonds  of  discip- 
line, and  the  Syrian  proconsul  was  less  formidable  to  the 


A U.  885. J 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


379 


prince  at  Rome  when  at  the  head  of  the  soldiers  in  the  field, 
than  when  he  winked  at  their  irregularities  and  debauched 
them  at  head-quarters.  The  frequent  occurrence  of  disas- 
trous earthquakes,  contributed  perhaps  to  make  the  people 
reckless  in  their  manner  of  life,  and  disposed  them  to  enjoy 
the  passing  hour,  and  drown  in  tumultuous  excitement  the 
fears  of  impending  danger. 

Hadrian  had  been  known  to  the  Antiochians  while  still  a 
subject.  Doubtless  they  had  made  sport  with 

, . , , . - J , . . 1 ..  . He  is  insulted 

their  usual  levity  ot  the  weak  points  m his  char-  by  the  Antioch- 

acter,  which  were  sufficiently  obvious.  They 
knew  the  circumstances  under  which  he  had  succeeded  to 
the  purple,  and  many  a ribald  joke  had  passed  among  them 
touching  the  favour  to  which  he  was  surmised  to  have  owed 
it.  Though  surrounded  on  his  next  appearance  in  their  city 
with  the  terrors  of  sovereign  power,  they  still  could  not  con- 
trol their  bantering  humour,  and  as  an  emperor  and  a philos- 
opher he  was  perhaps  equally  offended  at  the  frivolity  of  a 
people  who  had  no  sense  of  dignity  themselves,  nor  could 
respect  the  dignity  of  others.  Among  the  names  of  princes 
who  illustrated  this  spot  with  their  buildings,  that  of  Ha- 
drian, the  universal  builder,  finds  no  place.  On  the  contra- 
ry, he  took  from  it  some  of  its  cherished  privileges,  and  sub- 
jected it  to  the  supremacy  of  the  provincial  seaport  of 
Tyre.1 

Such  are  the  incidents  connected  with  Hadrian’s  sojourn 
in  the  principal  cities  of  his  wide  dominions.  There  would 
be  no  advantage  in  specifying  all  the  places  of  Hadrian  con- 
less  importance  which  he  visited  in  the  course  of  ^”ss  thron^h" 
his  unwearied  peregrinations.  Many  of  them  are  Asia  Minor- 

1 Eckhel,  Dodr.  Numm.  ill.  297.  Spartian,  Hadr.  14. : “ Antiochenses  ita 
odio  habuit  ut  Syriam  a Phcenice  separare  voluerit,  ne  tot  civitatum  metropolis 
Antioehia  diceretur.”  At  a later  period  the  emperors  found  it  necessary  to  re- 
move the  head-quarters  of  their  army  from  so  corrupt  a locality.  Procopius 
[Bell.  Pers.  i.  17.)  speaks  of  it  as  entirely  denuded  of  soldiers : r]  6t)  aQv/ianToc 
re  Kal  aTpariuTov  ep7/p6c  ion-  oil  yap  aXXov  ovdivos  rip  Tavrr/c  <5 r/pip  on  pi) 
Kavr/yvps&v  re  Kal  Tpv<pf;{ - pD.ei,  Kal  rf/p  iv  dsarpotg  ael  Tvpbg  aX?ir]h)vi - <pi7uo> 
vetdac. 


380 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  132. 


incidentally  mentioned  by  the  historians  and  biographers ; 
others  are  notified  by  the  legends  of  his  coinage,  in  which  he 
appears  as  the  Restorer  of  above  thirteen  places  or  provinces, 
a title  which  seems  to  imply  a personal  visit,  accompanied 
by  some  eminent  benefaction.1  He  erected  temples  at  Smyr- 
na and  Cyzicus,  buried  in  the  Rhseteum  on  the  plain  of  Troy 
some  colossal  bones,  supposed  to  be  those  of  Ajax,  and 
founded  in  Bithynia  a town  to  which  he  gave  the  name  of 
Iladrianothera,  in  commemoration  of  a successful  hunting- 
match.2  On  the  frontiers  of  Armenia  he  received  the  homage 
of  the  petty  chiefs  who  infested  the  confines  of  the  empire, 
and  impressed  on  Pharasmanes,  the  king  of  the  Alani,  a due 
sense  of  Roman  power  and  dignity,  by  clothing  his  gladia- 
tors, by  way  of  mockery,  in  the  gilded  vestments  with  which 
that  simple  potentate  had  sought  to  purchase  his  favour.3 
At  the  same  time  he  gratified  the  Parthian  Chosroes,  who 
had  resumed  his  ancestral  seat  on  the  Euphrates,  by  restoring 
to  him  his  daughter  made  captive  by  Trajan.  He  promised 
also,  it  is  said,  to  send  back  to  him  the  golden  throne  which 
the  conqueror  had  carried  off  from  Susa  ; but  this  magnani- 
mous restitution  was  never  actually  made.4  These  overtures 
of  reconciliation  may  have  been  timed  to  divert  that  still 
powerful  monarch  from  assisting  the  Jews  in  the  great  strug- 
gle which  broke  out  in  Palestine  in  132,  as  soon  as  Hadrian’s 
presence  was  withdrawn  from  the  neighbourhood. 

I have  not  attempted  to  follow  Hadrian’s  steps  accurately. 
The  scattered  hints  received  from  our  authorities  have  been 
Hadrian  once  variously  pieced  by  the  critics,  and  do  not  admit, 
AthensevlSltS  perhaps,  of  confident  manipulation.  I presume, 
a.  d.  133, 134.  however,  that  he  passed  through  Syria  in  132,  and 

1 See  Eckhel,  vi.  48*7,  foil.  The  countries  or  cities  thus  mentioned  are 
Achaia,  Africa,  Arabia,  Bithynia,  Gallia,  Hispania,  Italia,  Libya,  Macedonia, 
Mauretania,  Nieomedia,  Phrygia,  Sicilia.  Hadrian  travelled  with  a company 
of  architects  and  artificers,  ordered  after  the  fashion  of  a legion  of  soldiers : 
“ id  specimen  legionum  militarium  ....  in  cohortes  centuriaverat.”  Victor, 
F.pii.  28. 

2 Dion,  lxix.  10. ; Spartian,  Hadr.  20. 

3 Dion,  lxix.  15. ; Spartian,  Hadr.  13.  IT. 


4 Spartian,  Hadr.  13. 


i.U.  885.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


381 


after  some  further  wanderings  in  the  Eastern  provinces,  re- 
turned for  the  last  time  to  Athens,  and  there  spent  the  win- 
ter of  133-134.  At  Athens  he  might  witness  the  completion 
of  his  buildings,  and  enjoy  once  more,  with  the  greater  zest 
from  the  comparison  with  Alexandria  and  Antioch,  the  man- 
ners and  conversation  of  his  favourite  residence.  But  Rome, 
nfter  all,  the  centre  of  business  and  of  duty,  was  the  place  to 
which  the  imperial  pilgrimages  gravitated.  Wherever  else 
ambition,  cupidity,  or  thirst  of  knowledge  and  adventure 
might  call  him,  during  his  years  of  activity,  it  was  at  Rome, 
or  within  sight  of  Rome,  that  every  genuine  Roman  wished 
to  retire  in  declining  age,  and  compose  himself  for  the  last 
journey  to  the  resting-place  of  his  ancestors.  Hadrian  had 
already  reached  old  age,  and  had  governed  the  And  takes  up 
empire  sixteen  years ; his  health  too  was  much  11',ljIIl'j,SKleuce  at 
debilitated,  and  he  had  no  reasonable  prospect  of  A- D- 1S4- 
lengthened  days,  when,  in  134,  he  took  up  his  residence  in 
his  capital,  and  ceased  from  his  restless  wanderings.  Here, 
however,  he  continued  to  employ  himself  with  unabated  in- 
dustry. He  established  a university  at  Rome, 

J J ’ Establishment 

under  the  name  of  the  Athemeum,  alter  the  type  of  the  Athe- 

. naeum  at  Rome. 

ol  the  cherished  city  whence  it  derived  its  name, 
and  he  endowed  its  professors  on  a scale  befitting  its  metro- 
politan character.1  The  throne  of  rhetoric  at  Rome  took 
precedence  of  all  its  rivals,  both  in  rank  and  emolument. 
But  the  liberal  sciences  were  exotics  in  Italy,  and  produced 
no  popular  teachers  and  no  celebrated  schools.  The  activity 
of  the  Roman  mind  was  running  towards  law  and  jurispru- 
dence ; but  this  was  a practical  subject  which  formed  no  part 
of  the  speculations  to  which  the  career  of  academic  study 
was  prescriptively  confined.  While  philosophy  and  rhetoric 
were  stationary  or  retrogressive,  the  principles  of  law  were  rap- 
idly advancing,  and  Hadrian  was  himself  unconscious  of  the  so- 

1 Philostr.  Vit.  Sophist,  ii.  10,  8.  Victor,  Cm.  14. : “ ita  Grsecorum  more 
....  gymnasia,  doctoresque  curare  occoepit,  adeo  quidem  ut  etiam  ludum  in- 
genuarum  artium,  quod  Athenaeum  vocant,  constitueret ; atque  initia  Cereris 
Liberaeque,  quae  Eleusinia  dicitur,  Atheniensium  modo  Roma  percoleret.” 


382 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMAJSs 


[A.  D.  134. 


cial  transformation  which  was  already  taking  shape  under  his 
auspices.  At  Rome  we  behold  in  him  the  busy  and  earnest 
administrator,  surveying  from  the  centre  of  his  vast  domin- 
ions the  character  and  conduct  of  his  subordinates,  keeping 
all  his  instruments  well  in  hand,  assiduous  in  selecting  the 
best  agents,  and  strict  in  requiring  an  account  of  their  agency, 
putting  to  use  the  local  and  personal  knowledge  acquired  by 
so  many  years  of  travel  and  inspection.  Amidst 

Hadrian's  J J . . 

buildings  at  this  unceasing  round  of  occupation,  it  was  his  re- 
creation to  behold  the  glorious  buildings  still 
rising  at  his  command  in  every  quarter  of  the  city.  It  is  al- 
most wearisome  to  turn  again  and  again  to  the  subject  of 
the  imperial  architecture,  which  has  formed  a feature  in 
the  narrative  of  almost  every  reign  in  succession  ; but  we  are 
bound  to  remark  that  the  edifices  of  Hadrian  at  Rome  sur- 
passed in  magnificence  all  the  works  of  his  predecessors.1 
His  temple  of  Rome  and  Venus,  with  its  double  cells,  placed 
fantastically  back  to  back,  was  at  once  the  largest  in  size  and 
Temple  of  the  most  splendid  in  its  features  of  the  religious 

mis.  ' edifices  of  the  capital.  Raised  on  a lofty  base- 

ment on  the  eastern  slope  of  the  Velia,  and  looking  down 
into  the  hollow  in  which  the  Colosseum  was  injudiciously 
placed,  it  might  command  even  more  remark  and  admiration 
than  that  masterpiece  of  imperial  grandeur.  The 

Mausoleum  or  . 1 

Moles  Ha-  Mausoleum  which  Hadrian  had  created  for  him- 
self on  the  further  bank  of  the  Tiber  far  outshone 
the  tomb  of  Augustus,  which  it  nearly  confronted;  of  the 
size  and  dignity  which  characterized  this  work  of  Egyptian 
massiveness,  we  may  gain  a conception  from  the  existing  re- 
mains; but  it  requires  an  effort  of  imagination  to  transform 

1 Spartian,  Hadr.  19.,  gives  a long  enumeration  of  these  works.  It  was  re- 
marked that  Hadrian  modestly  refrained  from  inscribing  his  name  upon  any 
one  of  them,  except  the  temple  he  dedicated  to  Trajan.  Among  other  under- 
takings he  employed  an  architect  named  Hecrianus  to  remove  the  colossus  of 
Nero,  the  face  of  which  had  been  altered  into  a Sol,  from  its  place  on  the  slope 
of  the  Velia  to  another  site.  He  does  not  seem  to  have  accomplished  the  d if 
sign  of  Apoilodorus  to  erect  a companion  statue  of  Luna. 


A D 887.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE 


383 


the  scarred  and  shapeless  bulk  before  ns  into  the  graceful  pile 
which  rose  column  upon  column,  surmounted  by  a gilded 
dome  of  span  almost  unrivalled,  and  terminating  in  the 
statue  of  the  beatified  builder,  whose  remains  reposed  below. 
The  Mole  of  Hadrian  was,  next  to  the  Colosseum,  the  most 
distinguished  specimen  of  the  style  of  architecture  which  we 
designate  as  Roman,  whencesoever  really  derived  ; which  by 
raising  tier  upon  tier  of  external  decorations,  after  the  num- 
ber of  stories  required  within,  adapted  to  civil  and  domestic 
purposes  the  monumental  grandeur  of  the  Grecian.  Besides 
these  and  other  erections  of  his  own,  Hadrian  is  noted  as  the 
restorer  of  many  famous  buildings  of  an  earlier  date,  such  as 
the  Septa,  the  Pantheon,  the  temple  of  Augustus,  and  the 
baths  of  Agrippa.  But  his  services  in  these  cases  may  have 
been  but  slight.  However  liable  Rome  was  to  suffer  from 
fires,  earthquakes  and  inundations,  we  can  hardly  suppose 
that  these  structures,  most  of  which  had  been  repaired  by 
Titus  or  Domitian,  could  already  require  again  extensive 
renovation.1 

Hitherto,  Hadrian  had  been  able  to  follow  the  policy 
which  had  before  recommended  itself  to  his  predecessor,  of 
shunning,  by  long  absence  from  the  city,  collision  ITadrian 
with  his  jealous  nobility.  At  the  same  time  he  successor^ 
had  skifully  avoided  the  alternative  which  alone  modu^vSuB 
had  pi-esented  itself  to  Trajan’s  mind.  He  had  a.d.  185. 
kept  the  legions  in  good  humour  without  indulging  them 
in  the  exhausting  amusement  of  perpetual  warfare.2  When 

1 The  Tiburtine  villa  of  Hadrian  is  entirely  destroyed.  Its  site  is  said  co 
be  ascertained,  and  its  limits,  eight  miles  in  circuit,  may  perhaps  be  traced.  It 
embraced,  besides  the  residence  and  quarters  for  the  guard,  buildings  modelled 
on  the  Lyceum  and  Academy,  the  colonnade  called  Pcecile,  the  Prytaneum,  &c., 
at  Athens,  a Canopus  which  may  have  represented  some  edifice  at  Alexandria. 
In  its  gardens  was  a space  laid  out  after  the  fashion  of  the  vale  of  Tempe,  a 
Tartarus,  and  perhaps,  on  the  other  hand,  Elysian  Fields.  Spartian,  Hadr.  26. ; 
Victor,  Cces.  14. 

2 Spartian,  Hadr.  21. : “ expeditiones  sub  eo  graves  null®  fuerunt ; bella 
etiam  silentio  pasne  transacta.”  At  the  same  time  the  writer  adds : “ a militi- 
bus,  propter  curam  exercitus  nimiam,  multum  amatus  est,  simul  quod  in  eos 


384 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  135. 


however,  he  finally  took  up  his  residence  in  Rome  or  his  vil- 
las in  the  vicinity,  the  prince  of  the  senate,  the  first  citizen 
as  he  proclaimed  of  the  republic,  found  himself  the  mark  of 
an  envious  aristocracy,  encouraged  by  his  condescension  to 
fancy  themselves  really  his  equals,  and  disposed,  at  the  first 
sign  of  his  health  failing,  to  intrigue  against  him.  The  suc- 
cessor of  Trajan  and  Nerva  had  vowed  never  to  put  a senator 
to  death  ; and  the  only  instance  in  which  this  hope  had  been 
hitherto  disappointed,  was  excused  by  the  precipitation  of 
the  senate  itself.  But  such  a restriction  could  not  possibly 
be  maintained,  if  the  emperor’s  person  was  to  be  exposed  to 
the  machinations  of  senatorial  ambition.  Nor  was  Hadrian’s 
good-nature  proof  against  the  irritation  caused  by  increasing 
infirmities.1  Sensible  of  his  own  weakness,  and  anxious  to 
the  last  to  keep  faith  with  his  subjects,  he  determined,  hav- 
ing no  child  of  his  own,  to  choose  a colleague,  and  adopt  an 
heir  and  a successor,  as  the  best  security  for  his  own  peace, 
the  most  direct  check  on  the  irregular  aspirations  of  his 
nobles.  But  the  empire,  as  it  would  seem,  was  singularly 
deficient  in  men  of  eminence  befitting  such  an  elevation.  I 
do  not  lay  much  stress  upon  the  charge  of  jealousy  : :ade 
against  him,  for  rejecting  the  presumed  claims  of  personages 
so  obscure  as  Terentius  Gentianus  and  Plaetorius  Nepos.a 
Nor,  in  our  ignorance  of  the  circumstances,  need  we  dwell 
on  the  strange  intimation,  that  he  was  so  jealous  of  the  pre- 
tensions of  his  brother-in-law  Servianus,  then  ninety  years  of 
age,  as  to  put  him  to  death  on  a frivolous  pretext,  in  defiance 

liberalissimus  fuit.”  Victor  relates  {Epit.  14.)  that  Hadrian  used  to  boast  that 
he  had  gained  more  for  the  empire  in  peace,  by  the  skilful  use  of  bribes  to  for- 
eign potentates,  than  his  predecessors  by  war;  but  Spartian,  c.  IT.,  gives  a dif- 
ferent colour  to  these  pretensions : “ Regibus  multis  plurimum  detulit ; a pie- 
risque  vero  etiam  pacem  redemit ; a nonnullis  contemptus  est.” 

1 Of  this  good-nature  several  instances,  some  of  them  eccentric  enough,  are 
recorded : but  such  anecdotes  seem  hardly  worth  repeating.  See,  however, 
Spartian,  Hadr.  16,  IT.  20.  The  trial  of  wit  between  the  emperor  and  the 
poet  Floras  in  the  verses,  “ Ego  nolo  Caesar  esse,  etc.,”  is  well  known. 

2 A.  Plaetorius  Nepos  is  only  known  to  us  as  a commander  in  Britain,  from 
Che  various  inscriptions  in  the  neighbourhood  of  the  Roman  wall. 


A.  U.  888.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


385 


of  every  obligation.  It  is  said,  indeed,  that  many  other  mag- 
nates were  sacrificed  at  the  same  time,  some  by  judicial  sen- 
tences, others  by  assassination.1  At  this  period,  also,  the 
empress  Sabina  died;  and  as  her  dislike  of  him  was  well 
known,  and  it  was  even  rumoured  that  she  had  taken  pre- 
cautions against  conception,  lest  the  world  should  be  afflicted 
by  such  another  monster,  it  became  currently  reported  that 
she  was  taken  off  by  poison.3  All  these  charges  may  be  al- 
lowed to  stand  or  fall  together ; the  last  is  expressly  discred- 
ited by  a far  from  friendly  historian.  jST or  am  I inclined  to 
pay  much  regard  to  the  insinuation,  that  his  choice  of  a suc- 
cessor was  finally  determined  by  mere  unworthy  favouritism. 
L.  Ceionius  Commodus  Yerus  was  a young  noble  of  high 
birth  and  family  distinction ; but  the  Romans  refused  to 
allow  him  any  personal  merit,  and  affirmed  that  his  adoption 
and  appointment  were  made  in  opposition  to  the  universal 
feeling,  and  required  to  be  purchased,  as  it  were,  of  the 
people  and  soldiers  by  largesses,  donatives  and  shows.8  Such 
liberalities,  it  is  enough  to  say,  would  follow  the  designation 
of  an  heir  to  the  empire  as  a matter  of  long-established 
usage. 

The  descriptions  we  have  received  of  this  child  of  fortune 
seem  meant  to  reproduce  the  traditional  features  of  the  most 
Character  of  noted  voluptuaries.  They  represent,  however, 
Verus.  a certain  fantastic  finery  of  manners,  to  which  it 

would  be  difficult  to  find  an  exact  parallel.  The  habits  of 
Yerus  combined  the  effeminacy  of  Maecenas  with  the  dis- 
soluteness of  Otho,  and  the  extravagance  of  Petronius ; but 
he  possessed  neither  the  shrewdness  of  the  first,  the  courage 
of  the  second,  nor  the  genial  though  reckless  gaiety  we  attrib- 

Spartian,  Hadr.  23. 

3 Victor,  Epit.  14.  Spartian  mentions  the  rumour  as  “ fabula  dati  veneni,” 
a phrase  he  would  hardly  have  used  if  he  wished  to  accredit  it.  Victor  adds  a 
report  hardly  less  to  the  emperor’s  discredit,  if  true,  which  is  very  doubtful, 
that  she  killed  herself  in  disgust  at  his  ill-treatment,  “ prope  servilibus  injuriis.” 

3 Spartian,  1.  c. : “ adoptavit  Ceionium  Commodum  Verum  invitis  omnibus, 
eumque  jElium  Verum  Csesarem  appellavit.”  Dion,  lxix.  17. : Kalcrapa  ant- 
deige. 

132 


3S6 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  1S5. 


ute  to  the  last  of  these  voluptuaries.  The  few  anecdotes 
recorded  of  him  give  a picture  of  the  times,  if  not  of  the 
actual  man, — of  their  emasculate  dissipation  and  indolent 
elegance, — not  unimportant  to  our  historical  review.  Thus 
Verus,  we  are  told,  recommended  himself  to  the  emperor  by 
the  invention  of  a pasty  which  became  the  favourite  dish  at 
the  imperial  table.1  He  was  wont  to  take  his  mid-day  rest, 
with  his  concubines,  on  an  ample  couch  enclosed  in  mosquito- 
nets,  stuffed  with  rose-leaves,  and  strewn  with  a coverlet  of 
woven  lilies,  amusing  himself  with  the  perusal  of  Ovid’s  most 
licentious  compositions.  He  equipped  his  pages  as  Cupids, 
with  wings  on  their  shoulders,  and  made  them  run  on  his 
errands  with  a speed  which  human  muscles  could  not  main- 
tain, till  they  dropped.  When  his  spouse  complained  of  his 
infidelities,  he  gaily  bade  her  understand  that  wife  is  a term 
of  honour,  not  of  pleasure.3  This  despised  matron,  however, 
is  said  to  have  borne  him  several  children,  who  lived  to  en- 
joy and  prolong  the  honour  and  fortunes  of  the  family.  It 
was  added,  even  by  those  who  so  described  him,  that  if  there 
was  nothing  to  praise,  there  was  also  little  to  reprove  in  him, 
and  that  he  might  be  regarded  as  at  least  a tolerable  ruler. 
The  historian  allows,  indeed,  that  in  addition  to  the  grace 
and  beauty  of  his  person,  Verus  was  dignified  in  countenance 
and  impressive  in  his  delivery,  besides  being  a good  composer 
of  verses.  We  may  suspect  some  false  colouring  in  this  de- 
lineation, and  that  Hadrian’s  choice  was  more  judicious  and 
more  honourable  than  it  is  represented.  The  office  of  praetor, 
to  which  Verus  had  been  previously  appointed,  required 
under  a vigilant  master  both  industry  and  capacity;  and 

1 Spartian,  JEUus  Verus , 5. : “ tetrapharmacum  seu  potius  pentapharma- 
cmn,  quo  postea  semper  Hadrianus  est  usus,  ipse  dieitur  reperisse.”  Hadrian’s 
fondness  for  the  pleasures  of  the  table  is  mentioned  among  other  of  his  tastes 
or  accomplishments  by  Fronto  ( De  Feriis  Alsiensibus , 3.),  “ orbis  terrarum  non 
regendi  tantum  sed  etiarn  perambulandi  diligentem,  modulorum  tamen  et  tibi- 
cinum  studio  devinctum  fuisse  scimus,  et  prreterea  prandiorum  opimorum  eso- 
rem  optimum  fuisse.” 

2 Spartian,  1.  c. : “ usor  enim  dignitatis  nomen  est,  non  voluptatis.”  Our 
language  can  hardly  rival  here  the  compactness  of  the  Latin. 


A.  U.  888.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


387 


after  his  adoption,  this  pretended  minion  of  the  court  was 
sent  to  take  the  emperor’s  place  at  the  head  of  the  Panno- 
nian  legions,  on  the  most  exposed  of  the  frontiers.  Here  too 
he  had  occasion  to  exert  his  prowess  in  the  field,  and  ob- 
tained from  the  same  historian  the  praise  of  a respectable,  if 
not  a brilliant  commander.  The  sentiment  with  which  in 
his  first  hours  of  weakness  he  is  said  to  have  courted  death — 
that  an  emperor  should  die  in  health  and  not  in  sickness — ■ 
deserves  to  be  recorded  in  his  honour.1  The  expression  of 
his  numerous  busts  is  manly  as  well  as  handsome,  and  indi- 
cates intelligence,  frankness,  and  liberality,  far  removed  from 
the  common  type  of  Roman  beauty,  in  which  regularity  of 
feature  and  noble  bearing  scarcely  redeem  the  hard,  stern, 
and  narrow  character  which  plainly  underlies  them.  The 
portraits  of  Trajan  and  of  Verus  seem  to  belong  to  climes, 
ages  and  races  far  removed  from  one  another. 

But,  after  all,  the  wisdom  of  the  choice  was  not  tested  by 
actual  results.  The  health  of  the  new  Caesar  began  to  fail 
soon  after  his  adoption ; and  when  it  was  ob-  Hls  prematnre 
served  that  he  had  not  strength  to  wield  the  deajil,I)  138 
arms  of  the  imperator,  Hadrian  is  said  to  have  A- u- S9L 
exclaimed  with  bitterness,  that  he  had  spent  his  money  to  no 
purpose,  and  leant  on  a rotten  wall,  which  could  not  bear 
the  weight  of  the  republic  or  even  his  own.2  These  harsh 
words  were  carried  to  the  sick  man’s  ear,  and  aggravated 
his  disorder.  The  officious  talebearer  was  disgraced ; but 
this  reparation  was  of  no  avail,  and  the  invalid  expired  on 
the  calends  of  January  138,  in  the  third  year  of  his  feeble 
sovereignty.  Hadrian  woidd  not  suffer  the  holiday  of  the 
new  year  to  be  profaned  by  tokens  of  public  sorrow.  For 
Verus  the  portals  of  the  colossal  mausoleum  for  the  first  time 
opened;  but  his  surviving  colleague  felt  his  own  end  ap- 

1 Spartian  Yer  6. : “ stepe  dicens,  sanum  principem  mori  debere,  non 
debilem.” 

1 Spartian,  1.  c. : “ ter  millies  perdidimus  . . . siquidem  satis  in  caducum 
parietem  ineubuimus.” 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


388 


[A.  D.  138. 


proaching,  and  became  more  anxious  than  ever  to  provide  for 
the  peaceful  transmission  of  power  after  his  decease.1 

It  was  cited,  indeed,  as  a mark  of  Hadrian’s  heartlessness, 
or  levity,  that  when  urged  after  Verus’s  death  to  make  a 
^ fresh  adoption  without  delay,  he  replied  that  lie 

chooses  for  his  had  already  formed  his  resolution  while  Verus 

successor  T.  . T 

Aurelius  Anto-  was  still  living.  He  commanded  numerous  busts 

ninus,  , , 

and  statues  of  his  favourite,  directed  the  senate  to 
proclaim  his  divinity,  and  allowed  temples  to  be  raised  to 
him  in  various  places.  But  after  a brief  interval  he  called 
the  most  illustrious  senators  to  his  bedside  in  the  Tiburtine 
villa,  and  announced  that  his  choice  of  a successor  had  fallen 
on  T.  Aurelius  Antoninus,  a man  of  mature  age  and  approved 
abilities,  who  seems  to  have  been  universally  ac- 

and  requires  ^ 

him  to  adopt  ceptable.  At  the  same  that  he  made  this  adop- 

M.  Annius  Ve-  . . . A 

rns  and  l.  Ve-  tion,  he  required  lus  new  son,  who  was  also  child- 
less, to  nominate  heirs ; indicating  to  him  for  this 
preferment  Marcus  Annius  Verus,  his  own  sister’s  son,  and 
Lucius  Verus  the  son  of  his  deceased  colleague,  the  one  at 
the  time  a youth  of  seventeen,  the  other  a mere  child,  and 
both  already  favourites  with  him.2 3  Yet  the  choice  of  the 
elder  was  undoubtedly  determined  by  the  promise  of  his 
staid  yet  generous  character ; and  if,  in  regard  to  the  younger 
Hadrian  yielded  to  a natural  preference,  he  might  fairly  hope 
the  best  from  an  amiable  infant  to  be  trained  under  a parent 


1 The  uncertain  character  of  the  imperial  succession  is  strongly  marked  in 

the  instance  of  Verus.  It  is  nowhere  said  that  he  was  associated  in  the  em- 
pire, as  Trajan  had  been  associated  by  Nerva,  or  Piso  by  Galba.  Spartian 
says  of  him  significantly : “ qui  primus  tantum  Csesaris  nomen  accepit.”  Ha- 
drian honoured  him,  “ imperatorio  funere ; ” but  the  biographer  again  re- 
marks : “ neque  quidquam  de  regia  nisi  mortis  habuit  dignitatem.”  Neverthe- 
less JElius  Verus  has  always  been  enumerated  in  the  imperial  series  both  by 
ancients  and  moderns. 

3 Spartian,  Hctdr.  24.;  Yer.  7.  He  excused  the  adoption  of  the  younger 
of  these  with  the  kindly  expression : “ habeat  respublica  quodcunque  de  Vero ; ” 
which,  as  the  writer  remarks,  is  opposed  to  the  notion  put  forth  by  some 
that  he  repented  of  the  favour  he  had  shown  to  the  father.-  Comp.  Dion, 
Ixix.  21. 


A.  U.  891.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


389 


and  a brother  ot  approved  virtue.  He  had  now  done  his 
best  for  the  future  welfare  of  the  empire,  and  tormented  by 
maladies  beyond  the  reach  of  medicine,  and  conscious  that 
his  days  were  numbered,  the  sense  of  having  well  discharged 
his  greatest  duty  as  a prince  may  have  afforded  him  relief  and 
consolation.  That  he  gave  way  under  a painful 

....  . His  in  creasing 

disorder  to  excessive  irritation,  and  even  put  m-  infirmities  and 

_ „ . _ irritation, 

nocent  persons  to  death  xrom  caprice  and  vexa- 
tion, is  charged  against  him  by  historians  whose  ill-nature  or 
incapacity  is  sufficiently  apparent.1  But  it  became  the  duty 
of  the  gentle  Antoninus  to  soothe  his  bursts  of  passion,  and 
shelter  Ahose  they  might  threaten  to  overwhelm ; and  the 
gratitude  of  the  senators  or  courtiers  doubtless  prompted 
them  to  exaggerate  the  beneficial  influence  of  their  patron. 
The  sufferings  of  the  sick  man,  we  are  assured,  were  most 
acute.  Despairing  of  medical  relief,  he  resorted  to  the  arts 
of  the  magicians  ; but  the  imprecation  of  Servianus  was  ful- 
filled, and  in  his  agony  his  last  wish  was  for  death,  yet  he 
was  unable  to  die.2  Given  over  by  the  physicians,  and 
vainly  tended  by  astrologers  and  diviners,  he  implored  his 
own  attendants  to  put  him  out  of  pain  by  the  sword  or 
poison.  To  one  of  his  slaves,  a barbarian  from  beyond  the 
Danube,  he  pointed  out  the  exact  spot,  which  he  had  ascer- 
tained and  marked  on  his  breast,  where  the  heart  could  be 
reached  most  promptly  and  certainly;  but  the  fierce  swords- 
man fled  in  horror  from  his  presence.  It  is  said  that  he  even 
swallowed  in  his  despair  substances  which  he  knew  to  be 
deleterious.  At  last  his  powers  gave  way,  and 

, . , , 1 . = . and  death, 

he  expired,  worn  out  by  a long  disease,  which  a.  d.  m 
seems  to  have  been  dropsical.3  Among  his  last 
words,  delivered  perhaps  in  a brief  interval  of  ease,  was  a 
playful  address  to  his  departing  spirit,  which  if  it  has  attain- 
ed more  success  than  it  deserves  as  a philosophic  utterance, 

1 Spartian,  Hadr.  23.  23. : Victor,  Cccs.  14. ; Eplt.  28. 

" Dion,  lxix.  21.,  Ixxvi.  IJ. 

8 Dion,  lxix.  22. : Spartian,  Hadr.  24. 


390 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  138 


betrays  at  least  no  sign  of  tbe  gloomy  terror  or  remorse 
which  haunt,  no  doubt,  the  deathbeds  of  tyrants.1 2 

Hadrian  died  on  the  tenth  day  of  July,  a.d.  138  (a.tt.  891), 
having  lived  about  sixty-two  years  and  a half,  and  reigned 
Estimate  of  his  twenty-one  years  wanting  one  month.  There  is 
character.  none  of  the  emperors  about  whom  we  are  so 
much  disappointed  in  the  scantiness  and  questionable  char- 
acter of  our  materials  for  estimating  him.  We  must  ac- 
knowledge, indeed,  a general  consistency  in  the  impression 
conveyed  by  Dion,  Spartian,  and  the  still  briefer  epitomists. 
All  indicate,  more  or  less  clearly,  the  conflicting  elements  in 
his  varied  character,  his  earnestness  and  his  levity,  his  zeal 
for  knowledge  and  frivolity  in  appreciating  it,  liis  patient 
endurance  and  restless  excitability,  his  generosity  and  his 
vanity,  his  peevishness  and  his  good-nature,  his  admiration 
of  genius,  and  at  the  same  time  his  jealousy  of  it.3  Such 
contradictions  may  possibly  be  reconciled  by  considering  the 
circumstances  of  the  times,  and  the  manifold  interests  of  a 
complicated  civilization  combined  with  the  absence  of  a con- 
trolling principle  and  a guiding  object.  Not  in  Hadrian 


1 Spartian,  Hadr.  25.  The  biographer  treats  these  famous  verses  very 
lightly.  He  adds  : “ tales  autem,  nee  multo  meliores,  fecit  et  Grascos.”  To  me 
the  force  and  character  of  this  simple  ejaculation  consist  in  its  abruptness, 
brevity,  and  uncouthness,  like  the  verses  we  make  in  a delirious  dream.  Pol- 
ished and  paraphrased  by  modem  translators,  it  becomes  a trifling  common- 
place, hardly  worthy  of  the  considerable  poets  who  have  exercised  their  talents 
upon  it. 

“ Animula,  vagula,  blandula,  Soul  of  mine,  pretty  one,  flitting  one, 
Hospes  comesque  corporis,  Guest  and  partner  of  my  clay, 

Quas  nunc  abibis  in  loca, — Whither  wilt  thou  hie  away, — 

Pallidula,  rigida,  nudula — Pallid  one,  rigid  one,  naked  one — 

Nec,  ut  soles,  dabis  jocos  ? ” Never  to  play  again,  never  to  play  ? 


2 Thus  Spartian  describes  him  {Hadr.  10.)  as,  “ severus,  laetus , comis, 
gravis ; lascivus,  cunctator ; tenax,  liberalis  ....  saevus,  clemens ; et  seme 
per  in  omnibus  varius.”  Victor  ( Epit . 14.)  says  : “ varius,  multiplex,  multi- 
formis ; ad  vitia  atque  viitutes  quasi  arbiter  genitus,  impetum  mentis  quodam 
artificio  regens,  ingenium  invidum,  triste,  lascivum,  et  ad  ostentationem  sui  in- 
Bolens,  callide  tegebat ; continentiam,  facilitatem,  clementiam  simulans,  contrar 

que  dissimulans  ardorem  glorias  quo  fiagrabat.” 


A.  U.  891.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


391 


only,  but  in  all  the  eminent  men  of  his  time,  Trajan  himself 
being  no  exception,  we  miss  that  unity  of  aim  and  complete 
subordination  of  all  the  faculties  to  a ruling  idea,  which  exalt 
the  man  of  talent  into  the  man  of  genius.  Nevertheless,  if 
this  be  true  of  emperors  and  statesmen,  still  more  is  it  true 
of  the  lesser  men  who  related  the  incidents  of  their  careers, 
and  criticized  their  characters.  We  may  fairly  doubt 
whether  the  compilers  of  the  meagre  abridgments  which 
contain  all  we  know  of  them,  could  understand  the  greatness 
of  any  really  great  men,  if  such  in  their  own  day  there  were. 
Dion  Cassius,  if  we  may  connect  with  his  name  the  fragments 
preserved  by  the  manipulations  of  Xiphilin,  may  have  ac- 
quired an  idea  of  Caesar  and  Cicero  not  wholly  unworthy  of 
their  merit,  from  the  better  writers  whom  he  could  consult 
about  them ; but  where  left  to  his  own  observation,  or  to  the 
estimate  of  persons  nearly  contemporary  with  himself,  he 
may  have  completely  failed  to  rise  to  the  true  height  of  the 
object  before  him.  Of  the  feeble  biographer  Spartianus,  it 
may  not  be  unjust  to  affirm  that  he  would  have  spoilt  even 
better  materials  than  the  best  that  lay  within  his  reach. 
For  my  own  part  I am  dissatisfied  with  the  portraiture  we 
have  received  of  Hadrian.  I cannot  think  that  we  have  the 
real  man  before  us.  I imagine  that  he  was  really  greater 
than  he  is  represented,  and  that  many  of  the  stories  to 
his  disparagement  have  been  invented  or  coloured.  But 
I can  only  refer  this  impression  to  what  I remark  of  the 
character  of  his  administration,  in  which  he  undoubtedly 
reconciled  with  eminent  success  things  hitherto  found  irre- 
concileable ; a contented  army  and  a peaceful  frontier ; an 
abundant  treasury  and  a lavish  expenditure ; a free  senate 
and  a stable  monarchy ; and  all  this  without  the  lustre  of  a 
great  military  reputation,  the  foil  of  an  odious  predecessor, 
or  disgust  at  recent  civil  commotions.  But  the  merit  of  Ha- 
diian  is  above  all  conspicuous  in  the  decision  with  which,  the 
first  of  Roman  statesmen,  he  conceived  the  idea  of  governing 
the  world  as  one  homogeneous  empire.  Suddenly,  but  once 
for  all,  he  discarded  even  in  theory  the  tradition  of  a Roman 


392 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


[A.D.  138 


municipality,  as  the  master  and  possessor  of  all  the  soil  of  tlio 
provinces.  He  recognised  in  theory  both  conquerors  and 
conquered  as  one  people,  while  he  left  their  practical  equali- 
zation to  the  gradual  and  spontaneous  influences  which  were 
plainly  working  thereto.  He  visited  every  corner  of  his  do- 
minions, and  greeted  in  person  every  race  among  his  subjects, 
making  no  distinction  between  Roman  and  Briton,  African 
and  Syrian.  The  title  of  citizen  might  still  remain,  and  cer- 
tain fiscal  immunities,  though  balanced  by  countervailing 
burdens,  continue  to  maintain  its  nominal  preeminence ; but 
substantially  there  was  now  little  difference  between  the 
status  of  the  Roman  and  his  subjects  ; and  even  that  little 
was  vanishing  of  its  own  accord,  and  wanted  only  a stroke 
of  the  pen  to  erase  it  in  due  time  from  the  statute-book. 
But  though  thus  liberal  in  his  own  ideas,  the  prince  of  the 
senate  had  still  to  humour  the  prejudices  of  his  nobles.  Pie 
must  not  suffer  the  Roman  to  degrade  himself  in  his  own 
eyes  by  indulging  unworthy  indolence.  Accordingly,  Ha- 
drian discarded  the  freedmen  of  the  palace,  the  instruments 
whom  his  predecessors  had  thrust  between  themselves  and 
the  honourable  industry  of  the  knights  ; he  rivalled  Augustus 
himself  in  the  reverence  he  paid  to  the  toga,  the  symbol  of 
Roman  majesty,  and  required  the  senators  and  knights  al- 
ways to  wear  it  in  public.  It  seems  that  upon  the  citizens 
generally  this  staid  observance  could  no  longer  be  enforced.1 

On  the  whole,  I am  disposed  to  regard  the  reign  of  Ha- 
drian as  the  best  of  the  imperial  series,  marked  by  endeavours 
The  rei~n  of  reform  and  improvement  in  every  department 
hest^mhe^m-  administration  in  all  quarters  of  the  empire, 
penal  series.  The  character  of  the  ruler  was  mild  and  consid- 
erate, far-seeing  and  widely  observant,  while  the  ebullitions 
of  passion  which  clouded  his  closing  career  were  confined 
at  least  to  the  small  circle  of  his  connexions  and  associates. 


1 Spartian,  Sadr.  21,  22.  When  he  saw  a slave  of  his  own  walking  as  an 
equal  between  two  senators,  he  ordered  his  ears  to  be  boxed,  and  forbade  him 
to  converse  with  personages  who  might  at  any  time  become  his  masters. 


A D.  891.1 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


393 


His  defects  and  vices  were  those  of  his  time,  and  he  was  in- 
deed altogether  the  fullest  representative  of  his  time,  the 
complete  and  crowning  product,  as  far  as  we  can  judge,  of 
the  crowning  age  of  Roman  civilization.  His  H!s(Wreand 
person  and  countenance,  which  we  have  unusual  countenance, 
means  of  figuring  to  ourselves  from  the  number  of  his  busts, 
statues  and  medals,  corresponded  well  with  his  character. 
With  Hadrian  the  Roman  type  of  features  begins  to  disap- 
pear, Hadrian  is  neither  Greek  nor  Roman ; he  is  of  no  race 
nor  country ; but  rather  what  we  might  deem  the  final  result 
of  a blending  of  many  breeds  and  the  purest  elements.  He 
reminds  us  more  than  any  Roman  before  him,  of  what  we 
proudly  style  the  thorough  English  gentleman,  with  shapely 
trunk  and  limbs,  and  well-set  head,  no  prominent  features, 
no  salient  expression,  but  a general  air  of  refinement  and 
blood,  combined  with  spirit  and  intelligence.  His  face  and 
figure  are  both  eminently  handsome,  though  inclining  to 
breadth  and  bulk.  His  countenance  expresses  ability  rather 
than  genius,  lively  rather  than  deep  feelings,  wide  and  gen- 
eral sympathies  rather  than  concentrated  thought  or  fixed 
enthusiasm.  The  sensual  predominates  in  him  over  the  ideal, 
the  flesh  over  the  spirit ; he  is  an  administrator  rather  than  a 
statesman,  a man  of  taste  rather  than  a philosopher.  A cas- 
ual observer  would  perhaps  hardly  notice  that  Hadrian  is  the 
first  of  the  Romans  whose  bust  is  distinguished  with  a beard.1 
Hitherto,  though  the  arrangement  of  the  ham  varies  from  one 
generation  to  another,  or  follows  the  personal  taste  of  the 
wearer,  every  public  man  at  Rome  scrupulously  shaved  his 
cheeks,  lip  and  chin.  But  Hadrian  Atticized  as  well  as  phil- 
osophized, and  he  might  reasonably  incline  to  cherish  the 
natural  appendage  which  betokened  both  the  Grecian  and 
the  sophist.  Some,  indeed,  whispered  that  he  suffered  hair 
to  grow  on  his  chin,  to  conceal  a physical  blemish;  but  this 

1 Spartian,  Hadr.  26. : “ statura  fuit  procera,  forma  comptus,  flexo  ad  pee- 
tinem  capillo,  promissa  barba,  ut  yulnera  quae  in  facie  naturalia  erant 


394 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  138. 


explanation  seems  far-fetclied,  and  the  fashion  set  by  Hadrian 
and  adopted  generally  by  his  successors,  seems  rather  to  in- 
dicate a change  in  the  feelings  of  the  people,  and  their  incli- 
nation to  disregard  the  Special  distinction  of  race  in  deference 
to  views  more  enlightened  and  genial. 


A.U.  891.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE, 


395 


CHAPTER  LXYII. 


EARLY  CAREER  OP  THE  EMPEROR  ANTONINUS  PIUS. ATTITUDE  OP  THE  BARBA® 

RIANS. THE  WALL  OP  ANTONINUS  IN  BRITAIN. HIS  PATERNAL  GOVERNMENT 

AT  HOME. HIS  INDULGENCE  TO  THE  CHRISTIANS. HIS  VIRTUES  AND  HAPPI- 

NESS.— VICES  OP  THE  EMPRESS  FAUSTINA. — EARLY  PROMISE  OP  M.  AURELIUS. 

HIS  TESTIMONY  TO  THE  VIRTUES  OP  ANTONINUS. DEATH  OF  ANTONINUS  PIUS, 

AND  REMARKS  ON  THE  CHARACTER  OP  HIS  EPOCH. REVIEW  OF  THE  POLITICAL 

ELEMENTS  OF  ROMAN  SOCIETY. — 1.  THE  POPULACE  OP  THE  CITY. — 2.  TIIE 
PROVINCIALS. — PROGRESS  OP  UNIFORMITY. — EXTENSION  OP  THE  FRANCHISE. — 

DEVELOPMENT  OF  THE  CIVIL  LAW. 3.  THE  SENATE  ; ITS  PRIDE,  PRETENSIONS 

AND  IMBECILITY. 4.  THE  PR.ETORIANS  AND  THE  LEGIONS. THE  FINAL  SU- 
PREMACY OF  THE  SOLDIERS  INEVITABLE. (A.  D.  138-161  t A.  U.  891-914.) 


HE  adopted  son  of  Hadrian  was  in  the  maturity  of  his 


fifty-second  year,  when  he  was  admitted  to  a share  in 
the  sovereign  power.  After  the  fashion  then  Names  and  ti- 
prevalent  in  the  noblest  families,  he  combined  in  perorTHusTn- 
his  own  person  the  gentile  names  of  several  an-  t°nmusPms. 
cestors.  His  style  at  full  length  had  been  Titus  Aurelius 
Fulvus  Boionius  Arrius  Antoninus,  which  he  now  exchanged 
for  that  of  Titus  iElius  Hadrianus  Antoninus,  to  which  he 
added  at  once  the  titular  designation  of  Augustus  and  Cassar, 
and  soon  after  his  accession,  as  we  shall  presently  notice,  that 
of  Pius.  The  name  of  Aurelius  F ulvus  had  been  borne  by 
his  father  and  grandfather,  both  of  whom  had  been  consuls, 
and  whose  family  was  sprung  from  N emausus  in  Gaul.1  His 
mother  was  an  Arria,  and  both  an  Arrius  and  a Boionius  had 
been  among  his  maternal  ancestors.2  He  was  married  to  an 

1 Capitol.  Anton.  P.  1.  The  emperor  was  bom  at  Lanuvium,  and  educated 
at  Lorium  in  Etruria,  which  became  his  favourite  residence. 

a Capitol.  1.  c. : “ avus  maternus  Arrius  Antoninus,  homo  sanctus,  et  qui 
Nervam  miseratus  esset,  quod  imperare  ccepisset.” 


396 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.D.  138 


Annia  Galeria  Faustina,  by  whom  he  had  had  four  children, 
two  sons  and  two  daughters ; the  sons  had  died  young  be- 
fore his  advancement,  and  of  one  of  the  daughters  we  have 
no  further  account.  The  other,  however,  named  Annia  Faus- 
tina, he  united  to  the  young  Aurelius,  her  cousin,  whom  at 
Hadrian’s  instance  her  father  had  himself  adopted.  But  of 
all  his  names  the  most  interesting  is  that  of  Antoninus,  tvhich 
he  first  introduced  to  the  distinguished  place  it  occupies  in 
Roman  annals,  the  origin  of  which  however  we  can  trace  no 
further.  Fourteen  emperors  passed  away  before  this  desig- 
nation, sanctified  by  the  noblest  associations,  was  suffered  to 
disappear  from  the  imperial  style.1  So  deep  was  the  impres- 
sion made  on  the  Romans  by  the  virtues  of  the  two  illustri- 
ous princes,  who  assumed  the  sovereignty  at  the  death  of 
Hadrian  with  the  acclamations  of  the  senate  and  people,  and 
the  loyal  consent  of  the  legions.  The  demise  indeed  of  their 
late  jealous  master  was  felt  as  a relief  by  the  nobles  in  the 
city.  They  pretended  to  have  trembled  for  their  lives  and 
fortunes  during  the  pangs  of  his  last  illness,  and  in  their  zeal 
to  do  honour  to  his  successor,  muttered  a refusal  to  grant  him 
the  apotheosis  which  had  been  hitherto  denied  only  to  the 
most  hateful  of  tyrants.  Antoninus  meanwhile  removed  the 
body  from  Baite  to  Rome,  and  entombed  it  in  the  gorgeous 
mausoleum  long  prepared  for  its  reception.  When 

Rft  receives  o a a a 

the  surname  of  the  senators  observed  the  respect  with  which  he 
was  disposed  to  treat  it,  they  discovered  another 
mode  of  flattery,  declaring  that  he  had  rescued  many  of  their 

1 Capitol,  in  Opilio  Mavrin.  3. : “ enimvero  Pius  primus,  Marcus  secundus, 
Yerus  tertius,  Commodus  quartus,  quintus  Caracallus,  sextus  Gcta,  Septimus 
Diadumenus,  octavus  Heliogabalus  Antonini  fuere.”  These  eight  princes  aro 
enumerated  to  show  the  fulfilment  of  a certain  prediction ; but  others,  such  as 
Pertinax,  Julianus,  Severus,  and  Macrinus  himself,  might  be  added.  Alexan- 
der Severus  thus  addressed  the  senate:  “ Antoninorum  nomen,  vel  jam  numen 
potius,  quale  fuerit,  meminit  vestra  dementia.”  The  senate  replied  : “ vicisti 
vitia,  vicisti  crimina  : Antonini  nomen  omavisti.”  But  Alexander  persisted  in 
declining  the  name,  as  not  belonging  to  his  family.  The  senate  would  have 
called  him  Magnus,  and  at  last  forced  upon  him  the  title  of  Augustus.  Lam- 
pridius  in  Alex.  Sen.  9.  (a.  d.  222,  a.  u.  915.) 


A.  D.  891.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


397 


order  from  Hadrian’s  death-warrants,  and  on  this  account,  or 
as  others  said,  in  acknowledgment  of  his  dutiful  affection  for 
his  unworthy  parent,  decreed  him  the  surname  of  Pius;  a 
surname  eagerly  repeated  by  the  gratitude  of  his  country- 
men, and  destined  to  become  the  most  distinctive  of  all  his 
appellations.1  The  opposition  to  Hadrian’s  consecration  was 
now  withdrawn  ; his  temple  rose  in  due  time  at  Rome,  and 
an  order  of  flamens  was  appointed  to  serve  for  ever  at  his 
altar. 

In  noble  simplicity  of  character,  and  devotion  to  the  good 
of  the  state  they  were  invited  to  govern,  the  two  Antonines 
deserve  to  be  classed  together.  For  three  and 

t ^ . . His  early  ca- 

twenty  years  they  sate  side  by  side  m public,  reerandcharac- 

and  were  nominally  colleagues  in  the  empire : 
but  while  the  elder  governed  by  virtue  of  his  mature  age 
and  tried  abilities,  the  younger  trained  himself  reverently 
after  his  parent’s  example,  with  assiduous  and  painful  self- 
examination.  Though  vying  with  one  another  in  their  noble 
qualities  and  the  excellence  of  their  administration,  in  their 
temper  and  education  there  was  a marked  difference.  Aurelius 
became,  by  study,  reflection,  and  self-exercise,  the  most  con- 
summate product  of  the  ancient  philosophy,  while  Pius  is  a 
singular  instance  of  an  accomplished  Roman  contenting  him- 
self with  the  practice  of  virtue,  and  genuine  disregarding  the 
questions  of  the  schools.  From  his  early  years  Antoninus 
had  been  engaged  in  the  active  discharge  of  official  duties. 
Sprung  from  a race  of  curule  magistrates,  he  had  been  bred 
in  the  traditional  maxims  of  official  life,  and  had  become 

1 The  origin  of  this  title  is  variously  explained : 1.  because  Antoninus  sup- 
ported his  infirm  parent  in  the  senate ; 2.  because  he  saved  certain  senators,  as 
mentioned  in  the  text ; 3.  because  of  the  honours  he  extorted  from  the  nobles 
for  his  predecessor ; 4.  because  he  had  taken  measures  to  prevent  his  suicide ; 
6.  because  of  the  general  clemency  and  goodness  of  his  own  character.  We 
may  observe  that  the  title  first  appears  on  the  coins  of  Antoninus  immediately 
after  the  death  of  Hadrian ; and  that  the  festival  he  instituted  in  honour  of 
Hadrian  was  specially  designated  “Pialia.”  Artemidorus,  writing  in  Greek, 
calls  it  eiioifteta.  Eckhel,  Docir.  Numm.  vii.  36. 


398 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  138. 


qualified  for  distinction  liimself  by  long  training  in  tbe  career 
of  honours  under  an  able  and  vigilant  emperor.  Thence  he 
had  succeeded  to  the  government  of  a province.  He  had 
been  appointed  one  of  the  four  consulars  to  whom  the  ad- 
ministration of  Italy  was  confided,  and  had  finally  been  raised 
to  the  prefecture  of  Asia  before  Hadrian’s  experienced  eye 
fixed  on  him,  as  the  fittest  man  in  the  empire  to  lighten  his 
own  burdens,  and  conduct  the  machine  he  had  put  in  good 
working  gear  by  his  long  labours.1  Antoninus,  however, 
though  himself  a simple  man  of  business,  could  respect  spec- 
ulation in  others,  and  encouraged  his  adopted  son  to  employ 
his  leisure,  while  yet  young,  in  examining  the  bases  of  wis- 
dom and  virtue  under  the  ablest  teachers. 

Alone  of  all  the  chiefs  of  the  empire,  Antoninus  has  had 
the  fortune  to  escape  the  animadversion  of  the  historian  Dion. 
Unanimous  Reduced  as  we  are  at  this  period  to  the  meagre 
anlfq™ity7tohis  epitome  of  Xiphilin,  the  book  which  was  devoted 
virtues.  to  the  narrative  of  this  reign  had  perished,  save 

a few  brief  sentences,  even  before  the  time  of  the  abbre via- 
tor ; and  instead  of  the  harsh  and  captious  commentary  with 
which  Dion  reviewed  the  career  of  the  emperors,  we  have 
only  the  flowing  panegyric  of  Capitolinus,  which  if  devoid 
of  critical  sagacity,  is  free  at  least  from  the  vice  of  ill-nature. 
The  brief  notices  of  Antoninus  found  elsewhere,  as  in  the 
abridgments  of  Victor  and  Eutropius,  seem  to  have  been  de- 
rived from  kindred  sources  with  those  of  the  biographer, 
while  the  Christian  Orosius  concurs  in  the  unvaried  strain  of 
panegyric ; for  of  all  the  princes  of  this  age  Antoninus  alone 
was  free  from  the  sin  of  persecution.  It  is  a relief  indeed 
from  the  chequered  tissues  of  splendid  virtues  and  degrading 
vices,  to  meet  once  at  least,  in  the  course  of  our  long  review, 
with  a character  of  unstained  goodness,  with  one  man  fault- 
less as  far  as  we  can  trace  him,  in  act  and  intention,  and  yet 
not  wanting  in  manly  sense  and  vigour.  Trajan  governed 
the  empire  from  the  camp  and  the  frontiers ; Hadrian  from 


Capitol.  Avion.  P.  Z, 


A.  U.  891.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


399 


.he  provinces  and  the  schools ; Antoninus  devoted  himself 
entirely  to  Rome,  and  during  his  long  reign  of  nearly  a 
quarter  of  a century  never  absented  himself  for  a day  from 
the  city  or  its  near  environs.  He  had  seen  that  even  the 
peaceful  progress  of  the  emperor  through  the  provinces,  how- 
ever personally  frugal,  became  an  occasion  of  severe  exac- 
tions.1 Hut  the  genuine  moderation  of  this  practical  sage 
enabled  him  to  maintain  throughout  his  career  unbroken 
harmony  between  the  prince  and  the  senate.  Pie  made  on 
his  accession  the  customary  declaration,  that  none  of  the 
order  should  suffer  death  by  his  sentence ; a declaration 
which  pledged  him  to  moderation  and  economy,  that  he 
might  not  be  constrained  to  recruit  his  finances  by  confisca- 
tion. This  promise  he  kept  faithfully  to  the  end.  We  hear 
indeed  of  more  than  one  conspirator  against  him  ; but  of 
these  Attilius  was  proscribed  without  his  concurrence  by  the 
senate  ; Priscianus  slew  himself,  and  the  emperor  forbade  in- 
quiry to  be  made  for  his  accomplices.  It  would  be  small 
satisfaction,  he  said,  to  learn  by  such  investigations  that  he 
was  hated  by  a number  of  his  fellow  citizens.2  Once  only, 
in  the  case  of  a parricide,  he  sentenced  a noble  culprit  to 
confinement  on  a desert  island,  where  nature  herself  would, 
as  he  said,  justly  forbid  him  to  exist.3  While  however  all  the 
public  establishments  were  maintained  on  the  most  frugal 
scale,  he  was  munificent  in  his  gifts  and  largesses.  He  ac- 
quitted the  promises  of  Hadrian  at  his  adoption,  completed 
many  of  his  predecessor’s  buildings,  and  remitted  the  coro- 
nary gold  expected  on  his  accession,  to  the  Italians  entirely, 
to  the  extent  of  one  half  to  the  provincials.4  When  the 
treasury,  which  he  received  full  from  Hadrian,  became  at 

1 Capitol.  Anton.  P.  '7. : “ gravem  esse  provincialibus  comitatum  principis 
etiarc  nimis  parci.” 

a Capitol.  1.  c.  Victor,  Epit.  15.  The  particulars  of  these  conspiracies 
have  not  reached  us.  Attilius  bore  the  surname  of  Tatianus  or  Attianus  ; from 
which  we  may  conjecture  that  he  was  connected  with  Hadrian’s  guardian,  and 
therefore  himself  a relative  of  the  late  ruler. 

3 Capitol,  c.  8. 


4 Capitol,  c.  4. 


too 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  138. 


last  emjity,  he  replenished  it  by  the  sale  of  the  imperial  fur- 
niture.1 

But  the  reign  of  three-and-twenty  years  on  which  the 
pious  Antonine  was  now  entering,  was  not  destined  to  the 
enioyment  of  unruffled  tranquillity.  The  troubled 

Threatened  dis-  J 1 J 

turbances  on  state  of  the  frontiers  was  a source  of  constant 

He  frontiers.  . .... 

anxiety  and  expense ; and  even  within  them  some 
elements  of  disturbance  still  required  the  establishments  of 
the  empire  to  be  maintained  in  full  vigour.  The  Jews,  so 
often  quelled,  and  so  ruthlessly  down-trampled,  chafed  and 
murmured,  both  in  Achaia  and  Egypt ; the  nomades  of  the 
Atlas  ventured  again  to  encroach  on  the  zone  of  cultivation 
which  was  only  won  from  the  sands  by  constant  labour,  and 
secured  by  an  armed  occupation.  The  Dacians  did  not 
quietly  resign  themselves  to  the  yoke ; and  the  Alani,  a 
name  which  had  recently  become  formidable,  were  ever 
prowling  along  the  bank  of  the  Ister,  or  in  front  of  Trajan’s 
ramparts,  watching  an  opportunity  of  bursting  into  Moesia. 
Of  the  operations  conducted  against  these  various  enemies 
no  accounts  have  been  transmitted  to  us.  Incessant  and 
harassing  as  the  warfare  may  have  been,  it  led  to  no 
triumphs,  and  probably  to  no  decisive  victories.  The  mild 
and  peaceful  prince,  who  proclaimed  that  it  was  better  to 
save  a single  citizen  than  to  slay  a thousand  enemies,  follow- 
ed perhaps  the  example  of  his  predecessors  in  purchasing  the 
forbearance  of  the  invaders.2  In  Britain,  how- 

The  wall  of  An-  . 1 

tonmus  be-  ever,  we  learn  that  the  prefect,  Lollius  XTrbicus, 

tween  the  ...  , ,,  , . 

Clyde  and  alter  chastising  a revolt  ol  the  Bngantes,  car- 
ried his  arms  beyond  the  frontier,  and  com- 
pleted the  defences  of  Agricola  with  a continuous  rampart 
of  earth  from  the  Clyde  to  the  Forth.3  The  Roman  occupa- 

1 Capitol,  c.  T. 

2 This  sentiment,  it  seems,  was  ascribed  to  one  of  the  Scipios,  but  it  does 
cot  appear  on  what  authority.  Capitol.  Anion.  P.  9. : “ ut  Scipionis  senten- 
tiam  frequentarit,  qua  ille  dicebat,  malle  se  unum  civem  servare  quam  mille 
hostes  occidere.” 

8 The  coins  of  Antoninus  bear  Imp.  II.  in  the  year  139 ; and  this  title  was 


A.  U.  SOI.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


401 


tion  was  now  definitively  extended  to  the  upper  isthmus, 
while  its  outworks  were  pushed  perhaps  in  some  directions 
still  further.  The  district  between  the  walls  of  Hadrian  and 
Antoninus  was  rapidly  filled  with  monuments  of  southern 
civilization.  The  spirit  of  colonization  and  enterprise  seems, 
at  least  in  this  quarter,  to  have  been  as  active  now  as  at  any 
previous  period.  But  the  reason  why,  wherever  the  limits 
of  Roman  power  extended,  the  subjects  of  Rome  continually 
advanced  a little  further,  is  to  he  found  in  the  ardent  desire 
of  the  provincials  to  escape  from  the  pressure  of  their 
local  burdens,  without  placing  themselves  beyond  reach  of 
assistance,  or  cutting  off  the  means  of  a timely  retreat.1 

On  the  whole  the  historians  describe  the  external  policy 
of  Antoninus  as  singularly  successful.  The  authority  of  the 
empire  was  raised  to  its  highest  pitch,  and  ac- 

1 ° 1 ’ Success  of  the 

knowledged  by  the  most  distant  nations.  Rome,  external  policy 

-i,  J o-ioi  • • of  Antoninus. 

under  the  most  peaceful  oi  her  princes,  imposed 
a king  upon  the  Lazi,  who  dwelt  beyond  the 
Phasis.  She  withheld  the  Parthian  sultan  from  attacking 
Armenia,  by  the  terror  of  a proclamation  alone,  while  she 
refused  to  restore  the  celebrated  throne  captured  by  Trajan, 
and  so  often  redemanded.2  She  determined  the  quarrels  of 

probably  assumed  for  some  successes  over  the  Caledonians.  Clinton  in  ann. 
He  was  one  of  the  few  emperors  down  to  this  period  who  never  celebrated  a 
triumph.  Victor,  Cces.  15.:  “ nisi  forte  triumphorum  expertem  socordi®  vide- 
tur : quod  longe  secus  est.” 

1 The  ichnography  of  the  wall  of  Antoninus  is  delineated  and  described  in 
Stuart’s  Caledonia  Romana , and  the  few  inscriptions  collected.  The  remains 
are  far  less  than  those  of  the  lower  isthmus,  and  have  suffered  considerably 
since  the  time  of  Roy’s  survey.  The  portion  best  preserved  is  about  a mile  in 
length  near  Polwarth,  where  the  rampart  has  been  protected  by  a plantation. 
I presume  that  Ealkirk,  which  stands  on  the  line,  is  the  church  on  the  Pfalz  or 
Pale.  There  is  said  to  be  no  vestige  of  a stone  rampart.  From  the  absence 
of  later  inscriptions,  the  defence  of  the  wall  seems  to  have  been  relinquished 
at  an  early  period,  but  coins  have  been  found  along  it  of  the  date  of  Diocletian 
and  Constantine. 

2 Capitol.  Anton.  P.  9.  On  a medal  of  Antoninus  Pius  we  find  the  le- 
gend : “ Rex  Armenis  datus,”  but  to  the  event  itself  we  have  no  other  clue, 
Another  has:  “Rex  Quadis  datus.”  Smyth,  Roman  Medals,  p.  119. 

vol.  vu. — 26 


102 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


|A.D.  138 


various  eastern  rulers  with  their  rivals  or  subjects.  She  ap- 
peased. the  differences  between  Greeks  and  Scythians  on  the 
shores  of  the  Cimmerian  peninsula,  and  on  the  banks  of  the 
great  Sarmatian  rivers.  Appian  declares  that  he  had  seen 
at  this  time  at  Rome  the  envoys  of  barbarian  tribes,  who 
had  offered  to  place  themselves  under  the  yoke  of  the  mighty 
conquerors,  but  whose  allegiance  had  been  quietly  declined.1 
While  the  counsel  of  Augustus,  not  to  extend  the  limits  of 
the  empire,  sank  deeper  than  ever  into  the  minds  of  states- 
men, the  tendency  of  the  vast  body  to  attract  smaller  bodies 
to  itself  was  still  in  force,  and  required  stedfast  self-control 
to  resist  it.  The  reign  of  Antoninus  gave  rise  to  more  than 
one  signal  monument  of  the  size  and  unity  of  the  empire  in 
its  greatest  permanent  extension.  The  great  work  of  Clau- 
dius Ptolemgeus,  if  founded  on  the  principles  of  Hipparchus, 
Eratosthenes,  and  Marinus,  deserved,  from  its  extensive  ob- 
servations and  systematic  arrangement,  to  become  the  stand- 
ard work  on  mathematical  geography.2  The  Itinerary,  des- 
ignated by  the  name  of  Antoninus,  describes  the  course  of 
the  highways,  and  the  distances  of  every  station,  from  the 
Wall  of  Hadrian  to  the  Cataracts  of  the  Nile;3  while  the 
Periplus  of  the  Euxine,  and  that  of  the  Erythraean  Sea,  as- 
cribed to  Arrian,  show  the  relations  of  Roman  commerce  and 
navigation  with  coasts  and  colonies  even  beyond  the  limits 
of  Roman  sovereignty. 

The  list  of  the  emperors  is  not  wanting  in  names  of  men 
who  deserved  well  of  mankind  for  their  benevolence  and 

1 Appian,  procem.  c.  T.  Comp.  Victor,  Epit.  15. : “ quin  etiam  Indi,  Bac- 

triani,  Hyrcani  legatos  misere,  justitia  tanti  imperatoris  comperta.” 

3 The  latitudes  and  longitudes  of  Marinus  of  Tyre  were  adapted  to  a plane 
projection  of  the  earth’s  surface.  Ptolemy  applied  them  to  the  sphere. 

3 The  “ Itinerarium  Antonini  ” may  be  so  called  from  Antoninus  Pius,  from 
his  successor  Aurelius  Antoninus,  or  from  Antoninus  Caracalla.  The  work  un- 
derwent, no  doubt,  many  revisions  at  different  epochs.  That  on  which  out 
editions  are  founded  seems  to  have  been  as  late  as  Diocletian.  See  Iiiner.  An * 
Ion.,  ed.  Parthey : prsef.  p.  vi.  The  Itinerary  of  Jerusalem  is  doubtless  a latel 
work,  though  compiled  from  ancient  sources. 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


403 


A.U.  89^-j 

wisdom : we  can  discern,  perhaps,  taking  a 

’ ± -in  Paternal  gov- 

wider  view  of  their  poliev  than  was  possible  for  eminent  of  An- 

, . . . * . , „ toninus. 

their  contemporaries,  indications  among  them  01 
a genuine  love  of  clemency  and  justice,  which  their  historians 
have  failed  to  notice.  But  the  consent  of  ai^iquity  plainly 
declares  that  Antoninus  was  the  first,  and  saving  his  col- 
league and  successor  Aurelius,  the  only  one  of  them  who  de- 
voted himself  to  the  task  of  government  with  a single  view 
to  the  happiness  of  his  people.  Throughout  the  meagre  no- 
tices of  his  career  which  alone  remain  to  us,  we  discover  no 
trace  of  a selfish  thought  or  passion,  none  of  carelessness  or 
precipitation,  none  of  pride  or  even  of  pardonable  vanity. 
Every  step,  every  act,  seems  to  have  been  weighed  by  a 
good  heart  carefully  directed  to  a definite  end.  It  had  been 
said  in  praise  of  Augustus,  that  he  was  the  Paterfamilias  of 
the  whole  empire  : but  the  head  of  a Roman  family  was  at 
best  a beneficent  despot,  standing  aloof,  in  haughty  dignity, 
from  the  caresses  of  wife  and  children,  and  exacting  obe- 
dience from  their  fear  rather  than  their  affection ; while 
among  his  slaves  he  was  a tyrant,  self-willed  alike  in  kind- 
ness and  in  cruelty.  Antoninus  was  the  father  of  his  sub- 
jects in  a different  sense.1  The  time  had  come  when,  both 
in  the  state  and  in  the  family,  the  sense  of  mutual  rights  and 
obligations  made  itself  felt.  The  rule  of  an  Antonine  over  Ro- 
mans and  provincials,  freemen  and  slaves,  could  be  less  un- 
equal and  partial  than  that  of  an  Augustus,  both  from  the 
nearer  approach  of  all  classes  to  equality,  and  from  the 
higher  elevation  of  the  emperor  above  all.  Formerly  it  was 
the  highest  praise  of  a just  ruler  that  he  controlled  the  in- 
justice of  his  officers,  and  repressed  their  wanton  exactions. 
Row  the  procurators  of  the  fiscus  could  be  specially  directed 
to  exercise  moderation  in  extorting  even  their  legitimate 
dues,  to  spare  the  needy,  to  indulge  the  unfortunate ; and 
they  were  required  to  render  strict  account  of  their  proceed- 
ings. Every  complaint  against  the  powerful  found  ready 

1 Victor,  Epit.  15.:  “ quae  incredibili  diligentia  ad  speciem  optimi  patris 
familias  exsequebatur.” 


404 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  138. 


attention.  The  informers  who  lived  by  denouncing  default- 
ers to  the  treasury,  a class  whom  it  had  once  been  necessary 
to  foster,  could  now  be  firmly  repressed;  the  revenues  were 
to  be  collected  fairly  and  openly,  or  not  collected  at  all. 
Antoninus  tooli  no  pleasure  in  gain  derived  from  the  suffer- 
ings of  his  people.  The  salaries  of  idle  and  inefficient  officers 
were  reduced,  while  by  allowing  good  governors  to  remain 
many  years  in  their  posts,  he  abated  at  least  the  first  access 
of  their  cupidity.1  But  Antoninus  sought  to  acquaint  him- 
self with  the  condition  and  resources  of  all  his  subjects,  and 
mastered  the  intricacies  of  fiscal  science,  as  then  understood. 
His  judicious  economy  might  give  offence  to  some  who  could 
not  appreciate  its  rare  merit,  and  hence  arose  perhaps  the 
only  invidious  epithet  that  was  ever  applied  to  him.2  Once 
for  all,  on  attaining  the  sovereign  power  he  set  a noble  ex- 
ample of  disinterestedness  in  surrendering  his  private  fortune 
to  the  uses  of  the  state.3 

Simple,  however,  and  moderate  as  Antoninus  showed  him- 
self in  his  personal  tastes,  the  splendour  of  the  imperial  au- 
His  mnnifi-  thority  suffered  no  diminution  in  his  hands.  His 
to”s,eandieg"is-  largesses  to  the  people,  and  his  shows  in  the  cir- 
latioii.  cus,  fully  maintained  the  scale  of  magnificence  to 

which  they  had  been  raised  by  the  rivalry  of  previous  sov- 
a d 147  ereigns.  The  secular  games  with  which  he  cele- 
a.  tr.  9uo.  brated  the  nine-hundredth  anniversary  of  the 
city  were  worthy  of  the  solemn  occasion.4  Antoninus  con- 
tinued to  adorn  Rome.  To  him  are  due  the  completion  of 
Hadrian’s  mausoleum,  and  the  erection  of  a graceful  column, 
though  inferior  in  height  to  Trajan’s  or  to  that  raised  after- 
wards by  Aurelius ; he  is  believed  to  have  built  also  the 
amphitheatre  at  Nisnies  and  the  aqueduct  of  the  Pont-du- 

1 Capitol.  Anton.  P.  5. 

3 Xiphilin  (Dion,  lsx.  3.)  says  he  was  called  Kv/uvoirpu rryc,  or  pea-splitter 
(comp.  Zonar.  xii.  1.),  referring,  probably,  to  the  raillery  of  Silenus  in  Julian’s 
“ Caesars.” 

3 Capitol.  Anton.  P.  8. 

4 Victor,  Cces.  15.:  “ celebrato  magnifice  urbis  nongentesimo  ” 


A.  U.  891. J 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


405 


Gard,  the  noblest  monument  of  Roman  grandeur  beyond  the 
Alps.1  He  extended  and  improved  the  academic  system,  the 
most  marked  characteristic  of  the  Flavian  administration, 
with  the  feeling,  not  of  a pedant,  but  of  a liberal  and  accom- 
plished gentleman.2  His  long  and  tranquil  reign  was  farther 
illustrated  by  the  progress  of  legal  science,  Antoninus  being 
himself  active  in  dispensing  justice,  and  gathering  about 
him  many  expert  jurisconsults,  among  whom  the  names  of 
Ummidius  Verus,  Salvius  Valens,  Volusius  Montanus,  Ulpius 
Marcellus,  and  Javolenus  are  specially  recorded.  The  con- 
tributions of  this  emperor  to  the  imperial  code  are  known  to 
us  in  two  or  three  instances  only,  all  marked  by  their  leaning 
to  principles  of  equity  and  humanity.  In  wisdom,  in  science, 
and  in  temper  he  equally  deserved  to  be  designated  the 
Huma  of  imperial  Rome.3  But  the  great  merit 

. ...  His  indulgence 

of  this  paternal  ruler  was  the  activity  with  to  the  Chris- 

which  he  interposed  for  the  protection  of  the 

Christians.  The  proclamations  he  addressed  to  the  Laris- 

sseans,  the  Thessalonicans,  the  Athenians,  and  to  the  Greeks 

generally,  are  specially  mentioned,  in  which  he  proclaimed 

and  guarded  the  indulgence  already  nominally  accorded  to 

the  believers  by  Trajan  and  Hadrian.4 

1 A fuller  but  not  a complete  list  of  these  structures  is  given  by  Capitoli- 
nus,  c.  8.  The  column  is  interesting  from  the  sculpture  on  the  base,  which 
represents  the  apotheosis  of  Antoninus  and  Faustina.  The  emperor,  seated 
between  the  wings  of  his  Genius,  or  his  own  soul,  ascends  to  heaven,  preserv- 
ing the  unruffled  composure  which  distinguished  him  upon  earth. 

2 Antoninus  composed  his  own  harangues,  which  was  not,  it  seems,  the  case 
with  all  his  predecessors.  Several  of  these  were  still  extant  at  the  time  of  his 
biographer.  Capitol.  Anton.  P.  11. 

8 Capitol.  Anton.  P.  2.  Victor,  Ppit.  15.  Eutrop.  Breviar.  viii.  8.  Dion, 
lxx.  5. : oiirof  o fiact.7i.svQ  ’A vtuvIvoq  aptcroq  r/v  Kal  fzaXtcra  Nov/aa  Kara  ro 
rf/Q  T/yepoviaQ  d/xoidrpoTrov  afftog  Ttapa&aT.Xecdat,  nadairsp  bfj  'P aftv7.u  T paiavoq 
T:apair7.r]ctoQ. 

1 Euseb.  Hist.  Eccl.  iv  13.  26.  Dion,  lxx.  3.  We  may  perhaps  connect 
these  addresses  to  the  Grecian  communities  with  the  Jewish  disturbances  in 
that  quarter.  The  Jews  followed,  no  doubt,  their  old  habit  of  attacking  the 
Christians,  and  throwing  the  blame  of  the  disorders  on  them.  Antoninus  en- 
forced  the  rule  that  inquisition  should  not  be  made  into  Christian  tenets.  Oros. 


406 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  138 


If  we  turn  to  the  private  character  of  this  estimable  ruler, 
we  find  it  marked  with  a dignified  tenderness  which  is  inter- 
esting as  a token  of  the  period.  The  harshness 

Singular  happi-  ° ... 

ness  of  Antoni-  of  the  Romans  in  their  public  transactions,  and 

nus  Pins.  . . 

the  rigid  sternness  with  which  they  acted  m 
political  life,  are  strangely  contrasted,  throughout  their  his- 
tory, with  the  features  of  gentleness  and  kindness  which 
meet  us  in  their  private  behaviour.  But  at  no  period  was 
this  contrast  more  marked  than  under  the  early  emperors, 
and  no  portion  of  their  literature  exhibits  so  many  traits  of 
domestic  goodness  as  that  which  belonged  to  the  age  of  Nero 
and  Domitian,  and  embraces  the  pages  of  Seneca  and  the 
younger  Pliny.  At  last  the  element  of  feminine  gentleness 
which  underlay  the  rough  exterior  of  many  a Roman  war- 
rior, which  gleams  on  the  surface  in  Virgil,  Horace,  and 
Ovid,  and  may  be  descried  beneath  the  rougher  lineaments 
of  Lucan  and  Persius,  Quintilian  and  Juvenal,  which  lurks 
under  the  grim  reserve  even  of  Tacitus,  and  the  ill-veiled 
melancholy  of  Statius  and  Martial,  ascends  the  throne  of  the 
world  in  the  person  of  Antouine  the  Pious.  The  characteris- 
tic of  this  virtuous  prince  is  cheerfulness.  Doubtless  he 
would  have  been  less  at  ease  had  he  been  more  of  a philoso- 
pher. But  his  happy  temperament  seems  to  have  exempted 
him  from  the  painful  questionings  which  beset  the  men  of  his 
time  who  thought  as  deeply  as  they  felt.  He  was  content 
with  the  policy  of  his  epoch,  content  with  its  society,  content 
with  its  religion  ; he  was  satisfied  with  the  present,  not  anx- 
ious about  the  future ; while  the  goodness  of  his  heart  and 
his  natural  rectitude  withheld  him  from  the  selfish  indul- 

vii.  14.:  “ Justinus  philosophus  librum  pro  Christiana  religione  compositum 
Antonino  tradidit,  benignumque  eum  erga  Christianos  fecit.”  Nevertheless 
Antoninus  was  not  indifferent,  like  Hadrian,  to  the  religion  of  the  state.  An 
existing  inscription  celebrates  his  regard  for  the  established  ceremonial : “ op* 
limo  maximoque  principi,  et  cum  summa  benignitate  justissimo,  ob  insignem 
erga  caeremonias  publicas  euram  ac  religionem.”  Eckhei,  Doctr.  JSfumm.  vil 
29.  The  coins  of  Antoninus  abound  in  references  to  the  eldest  Roman  my- 
thology. 


A.  IT.  891.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


407 


gences  which  leave  a sting  behind  them.  He  possessed  the 
principles  of  the  Epicurean  with  the  practice  of  the  Stoic  ; 
and  tliis  union  constitutes  perhaps  the  fairest  compound  that 
Heathenism  could  supply.  Antoninus  was  apparently  the 
happiest  man  of  whom  heathen  history  makes  mention;  and 
I can  well  believe  that  he  effected  more  good  than  any 
other. 

The  attainment  of  power  had  wrought  a marked  change 
in  almost  all  the  earlier  Caesars ; in  some  for  the  better,  but 
generally  for  the  worse.  In  Antoninus  it  made 
no  change  at  all.  Such  as  he  had  been,  kind,  his  mildness 
modest  and  dignified,  as  a senator,  such  he  con-  ance  in  private 
tinued  to  be  as  emperor.  He  bore  himself  in  all  111  ' 
respects  towards  bis  inferiors  as  he  had  formerly  wished  his 
superiors  to  bear  themselves  towards  him.  If  he  demanded 
an  appointment  or  other  advantage  for  a friend,  he  never 
allowed  himself  to  dispense  with  the  forms  of  law  and  cus- 
tom. With  his  associates  he  lived  on  the  same  terms  as  ever. 
He  assembled  them  at  his  table,  or  presented  himself  at  theirs, 
and  rejoiced  especially  in  their  company  at  the  genial  cere- 
monies of  the  vintage.  He  stooped  easily,  say  his  biograph- 
ers, from  the  imperial  summit  to  the  level  of  civil  life,  and 
cheerfully  endured  the  raillery  current  in  the  polite  circles 
of  the  city.1  Preceding  emperors,  indeed,  had  mixed  on 
equal  terms  with  their  nobles ; Antoninus  was  patient  with 
the  populace,  and  treated  then-  ill  temper  with  forbearance. 
On  the  occasion  of  a dearth  in  the  city,  the  people  assailed 
him  with  stones ; but  he  only  applied  himself  the  more  assid- 
uously to  supply  their  wants,  and  studied  to  explain  to  them 
the  measures  he  had  adopted  in  their  behalf.  When  prefect 
of  Asia,  he  had  once  resorted  to  the  splendid  dwelling  oi 
Polcmon  the  wealthy  sophist.  The  owner  was  absent.  On 
his  return  he  was  offended,  such  was  his  arrogance,  at  the 
freedom  taken  by  the  governor,  and  insisted  on  his  great  but 
unbidden  guest  vacating  his  apartments,  and  going  forth  at 

1 Capitol.  Anion.  P.  6. : “ imperatorium  fastigium  ad  summam  civilitatem 
deduxit ; ” and  adds,  “ unde  plus  crevit”  Comp,  the  anecdote  of  Omuilus, 
c.  11. 


108 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  13S. 


midnight  to  seek  another  lodging.  Polemon  was  a favourite 
with  Hadrian,  and  the  emperor,  though  vexed  perhaps  at  his 
impertinence,  was  anxious  to  protect  him  after  his  own 
death  from  the  consequences  of  a quarrel  with  his  future  sov- 
ereign. Accordingly,  he  inserted  in  his  will  a statement  that 
his  choice  of  Antoninus  had  been  actually  made  at  the  so- 
phist’s suggestion.  Antoninus  could  not  be  deceived  by  this 
advice ; nevertheless  he  acted  as  if  he  believed  it,  and  heaped 
his  favours  on  the  fortunate  Polemon.  When  at  last  the 
sophist  presented  himself  at  Rome,  the  new  emperor  com- 
manded that  he  should  be  accommodated  with  lodgings, 
insisting  archly  that  no  one  should  venture  to  remove  him. 
An  actor  complained,  soon  afterwards,  that  Polemon,  when 
presiding  at  the  Olympic  games,  had  once  driven  him  off  the 
stage.  At  what  hour  ? demanded  Antoninus.  At  midday . 
Ah!  replied  he,  he  expelled  me  from  his  house  at  midnight .‘ 
In  the  absence  of  public  memorials,  the  whole  interest  of 
this  epoch  must  centre  in  the  person  and  family  of  the  prince. 
Domestic  life  ^'  °1'  shall  we  regret  to  rest  for  a moment  on  the 
of  Antoninus,  character  of  one  so  blameless  and  attractive,  and 
to  picture  to  ourselves  the  master  of  the  Roman  world  in  the 
bosom  of  his  private  connexions.  Antoninus  resided,  as  we 
have  seen,  wholly  in  Rome  or  his  neighbouring  villas,  of 
which  Lorium  on  the  Etruscan  coast,  and  Lanuvium,  his  own 
birthplace,  among  the  Alban  hills,  seem  to  have  been  his 
favourites.  His  mode  of  life  was  simple  and  abstemious ; 
his  robe  was  Avoven  by  the  handmaids  of  his  own  consort. 
But  Faustina  was  unfortunately  no  Lucretia,  and  the  vices 
of  this  licentious  woman  infused  perhaps  the  only  drop  of 
gall  in  the  cup  of  her  husband.  Tet  Antoninus  did  not  allow 
himself  to  resent,  or  appear  even  to  notice  the  scandal  she 
Licentious  brought  on  an  establishment  of  antique  severity.8 
character  of  the  JTaustina  was  the  sister  of  HSlius  Verus,  and  had 
been  married  to  Antoninus  before  his  adoption. 


ina. 


1 Philost.  Vit.  Sophist,  i.  25. 

2 Capitol.  Anion.  P.  3. : “ de  hujus  uxore  multa  dicta  sunt  ob  nimiam  liber- 
totem  et  vivendi  facilit&tem,  qu®  ille  cum  animi  dolore  compressit.” 


A.  TJ.  891.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


400 


This  adoption,  indeed,  he  may  have  at  least  partly  owed  to 
the  affection  Hadrian  naturally  bore  to  the  sister  of  his  lost 
favourite ; and  it  was  the  consciousness,  perhaps,  of  this  ob- 
ligation that  induced  the  inj  ured  husband  to  wink  at  her  ir- 
regularities. On  assuming  the  purple,  he  obtained  for  her  the 
title  of  Augusta;  he  gave  the  name  of  Faustinian  to  the  en- 
dowments he  made  for  the  support  of  female  orphans ; and 
ou  her  death,  which  happened  in  141,  only  three  years  after 
his  accession,  he  raised  a temple  in  her  honour,  the  remains 
of  which,  bearing  his  own  name  conjointly  with 

, ...  . . A,  Her  death  and 

hers,  still  form  a striking  object  m the  Roman  consecration. 

forum.1  Games  were  celebrated  in  honour  of  her  a.  d.  in 

apotheosis,  and  her  image  was  borne  among  those 
of  the  national  divinities.  The  coinage  on  which  her  name 
is  perpetuated  is  still  unusually  abundant,  and  is  generally 
marked  with  devices  asserting  her  eternal  godhead.  After 
the  decease  of  his  children’s  mother,  Antoninus  refrained 
from  introducing  another  matron  into  his  house  on  the  foot- 
ing of  legitimate  marriage,  and  contented  himself,  after  the 
fashion  of  the  most  discreet  and  dignified  Romans,  with  the 
inferior  union  known  to  their  jurisprudence  by  the  now  de- 
graded title  of  concubinage.2 

Both  the  sons  of  Antoninus  and  Faustina  seem,  as  has 
been  said,  to  have  died  before  Hadrian’s  demise.  On  their 
parent’s  adoption,  it  had  been  arranged  that  his  Mgn.iaw  of 
daughter,  the  younger  Faustina,  should  be  be-  ^0^1^  Faust- 
trothed  to  Commodus  Verus,  the  child  whom  he  ma- 
was  required  himself  to  adopt  together  with  M.  Aurelius, 
while  Aurelius  was  to  take  in  marriage  a daughter  of  the 
elder  Verus.  But  the  younger  Verus  was  but  seven  years 

1 The  inscription  recording  the  names  of  the  emperor  and  empress  is  still 
legible : “ Divo  Antonino  et  Divas  Faustinas  ex  S.  C.”  Capitol.  Anton.  P.  6. : 
“ tertio  anno  imperii  sui  Faustinam  uxorem  perdidit,  quse  a senatu  consecrata 
est,  delatis  circensibus  atque  templo.” 

2 The  regard  of  Antoninus  for  the  unworthy  Faustina  is  further  attested  by 
an  expression  in  a letter  to  the  rhetorician  Fronto  : “ mallem  mehereule  Gyaris 
cum  iEa  quam  sine  ilia  in  Palatio  vivere.”  Fronton.  Epist.  i.  2. 

133 


110 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMAN'S 


[A.  D.  13S. 


of  ago,  while  Aurelius  had  attained  to  seventeen.  The  char- 
acter of  the  one  was  as  yet  at  least  undetermined,  while  the 
other  had  already  given  excellent  promise,  and  was  daily  ad 
vancing  in  every  virtue.1  Accordingly,  Antoninus,  making 
the  immature  age  of  Verus  his  excuse,  did  not  hesitate  so  far 
to  violate  Hadrian’s  intentions  as  to  give  Faustina  to  Aure- 
lius. The  union  was  solemnized,  hut  not  perhaps  without 
some  years’  interval ; for  the  births  from  this  marriage,  of 
which  there  were  several,  date  from  a somewhat  later  period. 

Meanwhile  the  young  Caesars  grew  up  to  manhood,  and 
the  paternal  care  of  Antoninus  was  not  unrewarded  with  re- 
Early  years  gard  to  either.  Verus  was  of  a light  impressible 
M.dAurelius  °f  character,  easily  moulded  to  good  or  evil,  and 
Antoninus.  though  he  exhibited  none  of  the  qualities  de- 
manded of  a ruler,  he  seems  at  least  to  have  shown  as  yet  no 
proneness  to  vice.  But  Aurelius,  on  the  other  hand,  fulfilled 
with  advancing  years  every  hope  and  wish  the  fondest  and 
wisest  of  parents  could  have  cherished.  He  engaged  in  all 
the  athletic  and  martial  exercises  which  befitted  a youth  of 
family ; but  his  own  temper,  and  still  more  perhaps  some 
weakness  of  constitution,  and  lack  of  animal  spirits,  disposed 
him  by  preference  to  study.2 * * 5  To  the  cares  of  public  admin- 

1 The  opinion  Hadrian  already  formed  of  his  simplicity  and  integrity  is 

marked  by  the  appellation  of  “ Verissimus  ” instead  of  Verus,  which  he  play- 

fully bestowed  upon  him.  Capitol,  in  M.  Anion.  Philosoph.  1.  It  must  be  re- 

membered that  the  young  Aurelius  bore  also  the  name  of  Verus.  The  biog- 
rapher distinguishes  the  two  Antonines  by  the  titles  of  “ Pius  ” and  “ Philos- 
ophus.”  Other  writers  generally  designate  the  second  by  his  adoptive  name 
of  “ Aurelius,”  or  by  his  pramomen  “ Marcus.” 

5 Both  the  Cassars  seem  to  have  had  similar  advantages  of  education. 
The  names  of  their  numerous  teachers  are  carefully  recorded.  Of  Aurelius  it 
is  said  : “ usus  est  magistris  ad  prima  elementa  Euphranore  literatore,  et  Ge- 
rnino  comcedo,  musico  Androne,  eodemque  geometra : quibus  omnibus,  ut  dis- 
ciplinarum  auetoribus,  plurimum  detulit.  Usus  prajterea  grammaticis,  &c.  . . . 
usus  est  oratoribus,  &c.  . . . usus  est  etiam  Commodo  magistro  . . . usus  est 
et  Apollouio  Chalcedonio,  Stoico  philosopho.  . . . Audivit  et  Sestum  Chasro- 
nensem,  Plutarc’ni  nepotem,  &e.  Studuit  et  juri  audiens,  &c.  . . . frequentavit 
et  declamatorum  scholas,”  &c.  Capitol.  M.  Anion.  Phil.  2,  3.  Of  the  teachers 
of  Verus  a list  nearly  as  long  and  various  is  given.  Ver.  2. 


A.  U.  891.] 


UOTEK  THE  EMPIRE. 


411 


istration  he  devoted  his  patient  attention ; hut  his  heart  was 
in  the  libraries  of  ancient  wisdom,  or  with  its  best  living  ex- 
positors ; for  these  he  reserved  the  hours  borrowed  from 
sleep  or  recreation ; and  throughout  his  father’s  reign,  he 
never,  it  is  said,  was  tempted  to  quit  his  closet  at  Rome  but 
for  two  nights.1  The  time  was  coming  when  the  pale  student 
of  the  Palatine  would  be  required  to  pass  his  days  in  the 
saddle  and  his  nights  under  canvas,  on  the  wildest  frontiers 
of  the  empire ; but  however  ill  his  training  might  be  adapted 
to  harden  his  frame  against  fatigue  and  inclement  seasons, 
the  lessons  of  patience  and  endurance  he  learnt  from  his  mas- 
ters, imbibed  by  a congenial  spirit,  sufficed  to  fortify  him  in 
the  career  to  which  duty  called  him.  Disposed  by  his  own 
loving  temper  to  reverence  parental  authority,  he  was  an- 
imated by  the  approbation  of  a father  whom  he  could  justly 
admire.  When,  many  years  after  his  accession  to  complete 
sovereignty,  he  reviewed  in  an  address  to  his  conscience,  his 
own  principles  and  conduct,  he  could  refer  them  with  affec- 
tion and  gratitude  to  that  model  of  all  human  excellence. 
Though  himself  an  ardent  lover  of  speculative  philosophy,  he 
had  wisely  sought  a practical  director  in  the  conduct  of  af- 
fairs, and  he  seems  to  acknowledge  that  the  virtues  of  Anto- 
ninus had  served  him  better  than  even  the  doctrines  of  Zeno. 
After  enumerating  his  special  obligations  to  his  ancestors, 
his  friends,  and  his  instructors,  for  their  good  advice  or  pre- 
cious examples,  he  concludes  with  an  encomium  on  his  im- 
perial parent,  on  which,  lingering  as  we  fondly  do  over  this 
brightest  type  of  heathen  excellence,  we  shall  willingly 
dwell  vet  another  moment: — In  my  father  I 

, J " His  description 

noticed  mildness  of  manners  and  firmness  of  of  his  adoptive 
resolution , contempt  of  vain  glory , industry  in 
business,  accessibility  to  all  who  had  counsel  to  give  on  public 
matters,  and  care  in  allowing  to  every  one  his  due  share  of 
consideration.  He  knew  when  to  relax,  as  well  as  when  to 

1 Capitol.  M.  Anton.  Phil.  fJ.  It  was  mentioned  as  a token  of  his  devotion 
to  philosophy,  that  he  attended  the  school  of  the  teacher  Apollonius  even  after 
nis  elevation  to  the  purple. 


412 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  138. 


labour  / he  taught  me  to  forbear  from  licentious  indulgences , 
to  conduct  myself  as  an  equal  among  equals  / to  lay  on  my 
friends  no  burden  of  servility ; neither  changing  them  ca- 
priciously, nor  passionately  addicting  myself  to  any.  Prom 
him  I learnt  to  acquiesce  in  every  fortune , and  bear  myself 
calmly  and  serenely  ; to  exercise  foresight  in  public  affairs, 
and  not  to  be  above  examining  the  smallest  matters ; to  rise 
superior  to  vulgar  acclamations , and  despise  vulgar  reprehen- 
sion ; to  worship  the  gods  without  superstition , and  serve 
mankind  without  ambition  : in  all  things  to  be  sober  and 
steadfast , not  led  aioay  by  idle  novelties  ; to  be  content  with 
little , enjoying  in  moderation  the  comforts  within  my  reach , 
but  never  repining  at  their  absence.  Moreover,  from  him  1 
learnt  to  be  no  sophist,  no  schoolman,  no  mere  dreaming 
bookworm ; but  apt,  active,  practical,  and  a man  of  the 
world  ; yet,  at  the  same  time , to  give  due  honour  to  true  philos- 
ophers / to  be  neat  in  person,  cheerful  in  demeanour,  regular 
in  exercise,  and  thus  to  rid  myself  of  the  need  of  medicine 
and  physicians.  Again,  to  concede  without  a grudge  their 
preeminence  to  all  who  specially  excel  in  legal  or  any  other 
knowledge  / to  act  in  all  things  after  the  usage  of  our  ances- 
tors, yet  without  pedantry.  . . . My  father  was  ever  prudent 
and  moderate  / he  neither  indulged  in  private  buildings,  nor 
in  excessive  largesses,  or  extravagant  shows  to  the  people.  He 
looked  to  his  duty  only,  not  to  the  opinion  that  might  be 
formed  of  him.  He  teas  temperate  in  the  use  of  baths , modest 
in  dress,  indifferent  to  the  beauty  of  his  slaves  and  furniture. 
Such,  I say,  was  the  whole  character  of  his  life  and  man- 
ners : nothing  harsh,  nothing  excessive,  nothing  rude,  nothing 
which  betokened  roughness  and  violence.  It  might  be  said 
of  him,  as  of  Socrates,  that  he  could  both  abstain  from  and 
enjoy  the  things  which  men  in  general  can  neither  abstain 
from  at  all,  nor  enjoy  without  excess.1 

Such  is  the  portrait  of  this  paragon  of  humanity,  drawn 

1 M.  Aurel.  Commentariorum,  i.  16.  The  proper  title  of  the  volume,  which 
1 thus  designate  for  convenience,  and  which  is  sometimes  cited  as  Meditatixmes , 
or  De  vita  sua,  is  rtiv  elf  lawov ; “ an  address  to  himself.” 


A U 891.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


41? 


by  one  who  knew  him,  and  drawn,  as  it  appears,  without 
exaggeration.  The  testimony  of  Aurelius  may  Fi<rnre  of  An_ 
well  be  credited,  confirmed  as  it  is  by  the  con-  tonmus  Re- 
current voice  of  Xiphilin,  Orosius,  Victor,  and  Capitolinus. 
These  moral  excellences  were  set  off  by  a noble  figure  and 
expression:  the  numerous  busts  and  medals  of  Antoninus 
agree  in  representing  him  as  one  of  the  finest  in  personal  ap- 
pearance of  the  whole  line  of  Csesars.1  Rome  enjoyed  the 
blessing  of  his  administration  for  the  long  period  of  twenty- 
three  years,  and  at  the  ripe  age  of  seventy-four  he  was  carried 
off  at  Lorium  by  gastric  fever.2  Feeling  his  end  approach- 
ing, he  confirmed  in  the  presence  of  his  chief  officers  the 
choice  he  had  made  of  Aurelius  for  his  successor.  To  this 
object  of  love  and  hope  he  recommended  the  care  of  his 
daughter  and  of  the  state;  then,  divesting  himself  of  the  en- 
signs of  sovereignty,  he  commanded  the  golden  image  of 
Fortune,  which  the  emperors  set  up  in  their  inner  chamber, 
to  be  transported  to  the  apartment  of  his  designated  heir. 
In  the  delirium  which  followed,  the  good  old  man  was  heard 
to  mutter  about  the  welfare  of  the  republic;  and  njg  composiire 
in  the  moments  of  returning  sense  which  preced-  m death- 
ed  his  decease,  gave  to  the  tribune  of  his  guard  the  watch- 
word, Equanimity .3 

This  anecdote  indeed  may  well  have  been  the  invention 
of  a later  period,  so  aptly  does  it  correspond  not  only  with 
the  traditional  character  of  the  man  to  whom  it 

. . , i , -ii  n -i  . Tlie  eP0Cl> 

is  ascribed,  but  with  the  temper  of  the  epoch  it-  Antoninas 
self,  which  in  the  eyes  of  succeeding  generations 

1 Victor,  Fpit.  15. : “ vultu  sereno  et  pulcro,  procerus  membra,  decentcr 
validus.” 

2 Antoninus  Pius  was  associated  in  the  empire  Feb.  138 : he  succeeded  to 
Hadrian  July  10,  138,  and  died  March  7,  161 ; accordingly  he  reigned  from  the 
first  date  twenty-three  years  and  about  one  month,  from  the  second  Venty- 
two  years  and  nearly  eight  months.  His  age  was  '74  years,  5 months,  16  days. 
Clinton,  Fast.  Rom.  ann.  161 ; but  the  statements  of  our  authorities  do  not  ex- 
actly correspond  with  one  another. 

3 Capitol.  Anton.  P.  12. ; M.  Anton.  Philos.  7. 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  13S, 


114 

he  represented.1 2  Equanimity  of  mind,  composure  of  de- 
meanour, were  the  distinguishing  traits  of  the  good  Antoni- 
nus ; and  they  seem  to  have  been  the  result  of  his  well- 
balanced  nature,  rather  than  the  product  of  education  and 
reflection.3  As  regards  the  period  also  which  lie  illustrated 
by  his  virtues,  there  now  occurs  a pause  in  the  life  of  the 
Roman  people,  from  the  momentary  equilibrium  of  conflict- 
ing forces.  The  turbulent  career  of  Roman  affairs  may  be 
likened  to  the  stream  beginning  as  a mountain-torrent  in  con- 
stant uproar  and  irritation,  gradually  gaining  the  compact 
energy  of  a river,  majestic  in  its  collected  force,  but  ready  to 
boil  into  fury  if  impeded  by  a sudden  obstacle,  widening  at 
last  and  deepening  into  a placid  lake,  in  which  the  eye  can 
scarce  detect  the  direction  of  the  current.  But  the  mightiest 
rivers,  after  expanding  into  such  inland  seas,  are  sometimes 
again  abruptly  straitened  by  encroaching  cliffs  and  ledges, 
and  their  languid  serenity,  so  much  admired  and  trusted, 
proves  only  the  torrent's  stillness  ere  it  dash  below.  So  it  was 
with  the  empire  of  the  Cassars.  The  reign  of  the  elder  An- 
tonine  was  like  the  Erie  of  the  great  St.  Lawrence ; and  when 
his  successor  received  the  fatal  sceptre,  the  fitful  stream  was 
already  rushing  with  resistless  though  yet  unruffled  rapidity 
to  the  verge  of  the  Niagara,  in  which  its  repose  and  dignity 
were  to  be  engulfed.3 

1 Thus  similar  stories  of  the  last  words  of  later  emperors,  the  “ laboremus  ” 
of  Severus,  the  “ militemus  ” of  Pertinax,  seem  to  have  a mythic  significance. 

2 Victor,  Cces.  15.:  “adeo  sequalis,  probisque  moribus,  uti  plane  docuerit, 
neque  jugi  pace,  ac  longo  otio  absoluta  ingenia  corrumpi.” 

The  solemnity  of  his  consecration  seems  to  have  called  forth  a genuine  en- 
thusiasm. Capitol.  Anton.  P.  in  fin. : “ a senatu  divus  est  appellatus  cunetis 
certatim  adnitentibus,  cum  omnes  ejus  pietatem,  clementiam,  ingemum,  sanctl- 
moniam  laudarent.” 

* Thus  Statius  also  describes  a pause  in  the  career  of  the  “ headlong  4nio." 
9ylv.  i.  3.  20 : 

“ Ipse  Anien  (miranda  fides),  infraque  superque 
Saxeus,  hie  tumidam  rabiem  spumosaque  ponit 
Murmura ; ceu  placidi  veritus  turbare  Vopisci 
Pieriosque  dies,  et  habentes  carmina  somnos.” 


A U.  891. J 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


415 


To  this  extreme  verge  I am  about  to  lead  the  reader  be- 
fore I commit  him  to  the  care  of  a firmer  and  more  expe- 
rienced guide,  who  may  teach  him  to  look  into 

° 1 J m Review  of  the 

the  abyss  without  dismay  or  dizziness.  But  be-  political  eie- 

J J ments  of  Ko- 

fore  commencing  my  final  chapter  I will  ask  him  man  society  at 
° J . . this  period. 

to  pause  for  a moment  with  me,  and  review  rap- 
idly the  chief  elements  of  political  society  at  this  eventful 
epoch. 

I.  The  world  could  not  be  governed  by  the  local  munici- 
pality of  an  Italian  city.  Dimly  conscious  of  the  necessity 
of  unfolding  wider  principles,  Augustus  had  in-  1 Xhe  n_ 
rented  his  abortive  scheme  for  the  representation  lace  of  l'ie  city- 
of  more  remote  communities.  The  failure  of  this  feeble 
attempt  to  invigorate  the  popular  assembly  was  followed  by 
the  suppression  of  the  assembly  itself  under  Tiberius.  The 
trifling  part  henceforth  conceded  to  the  people  in  ratifying 
the  legislation  of  their  rulers  hardly  deserves  consideration. 
The  real  value  of  the  urban  suffrage  had  lain  in  the  import- 
ance it  gave  the  electors  in  the  eyes  of  candidates ; and  for 
this  and  the  substantial  advantages  it  secured  them,  the  ple- 
beian had  accepted  the  toils  and  risks  of  military  service. 
But  from  the  moment  when  the  suffrage  was  taken  from  him 


he  declined  enlistment.  He  flung  away  his  sword  at  the 
same  time  that  he  surrendered  his  privileges.1  This  volun- 
tary disarming  was  not  unpleasing  to  the  emperors.  The 
commons  of  the  city,  forming  a great  national  guard  under 
officers  of  then’  own  election,  as  in  the  free  state,  would  have 
effectually  controlled  the  princeps  and  the  imperator,  until 
at  least  they  had  mutually  destroyed  one  another’.  Unarmed 
as  they  now  were,  they  might  raise  disturbances  and  sedi- 
tions, but  they  could  not  overthrow  governments.  We  have 
seen  the  anxiety  with  which  the  emperors  provided  for  their 
support  and  amusement,  and  how  they  winked  at  the  fac- 


1 There  was  a partial  revival  of  the  comitia  under  Trajan.  Plin.  Paneg. 
63.  U.  If  his  military  schemes  required  him  to  levy  soldiers  in  the  city,  he 
might  seek  to  compensate  the  citizens  by  infusing  a little  more  vigour  into  the 
old  machinery  of  the  Campus  Martius. 


416 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  13S 


tions  of  the  theatre  and  circus,  as  a vent  for  popular  caprice. 
Claudius  and  even  the  virtuous  Antoninus  were  pelted  in  the 
forum,  and  meekly  endured  the  insult.  Nero  despised  the 
murmurs  of  the  senate,  so  long  as  he  could  command  the  ac- 
clamations of  the  mob.  Nevertheless  we  must  not  suppose 
that  the  mass  of  the  citizens  at  Rome  exercised  any  real 
political  influence.  A prince  who  was  firm  in  the  sup- 
port of  the  senate  or  the  legions  had  no  cause  to  fear  them. 
Tiberius,  the  most  cautious  of  the  Caesars,  who  had  been  fain 
to  restore  to  the  people  a favourite  statue  which  he  had  re- 
moved from  the  baths  to  his  own  palace,  did  not  hesitate  to 
require  the  prompt  suppression  of  a tumult,  and  to  reprimand 
the  magistrates  who  had  weakly  succumbed  to  it.1  Caius, 
Domitian,  and  others  indulged  their  moody  cruelty  towards 
all  classes  indiscriminately.  Hadrian  rebuked  the  mob  with 
haughty  dignity.  The  masses  of  the  free  popu- 

Contempt  into  . & J ° . J 11 

which  they  had  lation  were  m fact  politically  helpless.  They 
were  detached  from  the  nobles,  their  natural  lead- 
ers, by  the  habits  of  mutual  independence  and  distrust  which 
their  princes  had  fostered  in  both  classes.  Steeped  in  sloth- 
fulness and  poverty  they  had  neither  intelligence  nor  re- 
sources. Mingled  and  confounded  with  the  crowd  of  enfran- 
chised slaves  of  foreign  origin  and  ideas,  they  had  lost  the 
traditions  of  race,  which  had  formerly  bound  the  Roman 
citizens  together,  and  gave  them  confidence  in  one  another. 
Disarmed,  disorganized,  and  untrained,  it  was  impossible  for 
them  to  act  against  the  moral  weight  of  the  wealthy  and  the 
noble,  still  more  against  the  sword  and  spear  of  the  legion- 
aries and  praetorians.  They  had  now  ceased  altogether  to 
be  counted  among  the  political  forces  of  the  empire.  We 
may  dismiss  them  henceforth  from  our  consideration. 

II.  If  we  now  extend  our  view  from  the  mass  of  the  citi- 
zens within  the  walls  of  the  capital  to  the  much  larger  mass 
of  citizens  beyond  them,  we  shall  meet  with  an 

2.  The  popula-  J . .»  „ 

tionoftho  object  of  greater  interest,  if  not  of  more  real  po- 
litical importance.  The  emperors  seem  for  the 
1 Tac.  Ann.  vi.  13.  FI  in.  Hist.  Hat.  xxxiv.  19,  6. 


A.  U.  891.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


417 


most  part  to  have  worked  deliberately  in  favour  of  their  for- 
eign subjects,  enlarging  the  sphere  of  Roman  citizenship,  and 
generalizing  the  principles  of  Roman  jurisprudence.  They 
had  not  the  genius,  nor  perhaps  the  wish,  to  create  a new 
constitution  for  the  empire  ; but  taking  the  Roman  munici- 
pality for  their  model,  they  contrived  by  a series  of  labori- 
ous experiments  to  apply  its  principles  to  the  inferior  races. 
The  freeman  of  the  imperial  commonwealth,  though  long  de- 
prived of  his  legislative  and  elective  privileges,  was  distin- 
guished from  the  stranger  within  the  same  borders  by  ex- 
emption from  certain  fiscal  burdens,  and  subjection  to  a 
special  code  of  laws.  The  internal  history  of  the  empire, 
obscure  as  it  is,  turns  chiefly  on  the  extension  of  the  Ro 
man  franchise  in  the  provinces. 

Roman  citizenship  had  its  drawbacks  as  well  as  its  ad- 
vantages. When  after  a desperate  struggle  the  franchise 
was  conceded  to  the  states  of  Italy,  it  was  discovered,  with 
surprise,  that  the  boon  was  after  all  but  little 

tit  i . „ ......  Extension  of 

relished,  and  was  in  tact  wholly  declmed  by  large  the  Roman 
numbers  of  the  people  who  had  just  made  it  the 
watchword  of  a sanguinary  struggle.  The  Social  War  had 
been  really  fought  for  the  chiefs  of  the  Italians,  not  for  the 
people.  The  leaders  of  the  confederates  contended  for  a 
share  in  the  emoluments  of  foreign  conquest.  They  expect- 
ed. that  the  franchise  would  raise  them  to  the  rank  of 
knights  or  senators  of  the  conquering  state,  to  the  control 
of  her  revenues,  or  the  command  of  her  armies.  But  the 
mass  of  their  followers  submitted  blindly  to  their  guidance, 
and  Avhen  at  last  they  opened  their  eyes  on  the  morrow  of 
their  victory,  were  appalled  at  the  prospect  of  the  burdens 
and  obligations  which  would  now  fall  to  their  share.  The 
Roman  franchise  was  a severe  discipline.  The  laws  and  usages 
under  which  the  child  of  Quirinus  lived  from  his  era-  Its  hardsh!pa 
die  to  his  grave,  were  hardly  endurable  even  by  and  vexations, 
those  who  were  inured  to  them  by  life-long  habit,  and  he 
was  glad  and  anxious  to  escape  from  them,  even  with  the 
sacrifice  of  conscience  and  self-respect.  Every  citizen,  in- 


118 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  138. 


deed,  so  far  as  he  was  the  occupier  of  Roman  or  Quiritary 
soil,  which  from  henceforth  comprehended  the  whole  of 
Italy,  enjoyed  exemption  from  the  tribute  or  rentcharge  due 
to  the  state  as  the  supreme  owner  of  provincial  territory. 
But  on  the  other  baud  he  became  liable  not  only  to  the  mili- 
tary conscriptions,  but  to  the  code  of  civil  law,  which,  in 
many  respects,  as  in  regard  to  family  and  marriage,  to  con- 
tracts, and  the  transfer  of  property,  was  framed  in  a harsh 
and  formal  spirit,  revolting  to  a people  trained  in  a laxer 
system,  or  accustomed  at  least  to  other  ways  and  notions. 
Of  the  laws  of  the  Etruscans  and  Samnites  we  know  indeed 
nothing : possibly  they  were  not  less  severe  and  stringent 
than  those  of  Rome  ; but  these  nations  had  at  least  grown 
up  under  them,  and  their  prejudices  now  rebelled  against  the 
artiiicial  customs  of  the  city  on  the  Tiber,  which  none  but 
Roman  patricians  could  expound  to  them.  The  Romans 
were  little  disposed  to  make  concessions,  and  smooth  the  as- 
perities which  repelled  their  new  associates  ; and  accordingly 
enfranchisement,  though  ultimately  inevitable,  was  a work 
of  time,  and  the  result  of  mutual  intercourse. 

The  great  experiment  of  the  consolidation  of  Italy,  thus 
partially  successful,  was  never  repeated  on  a large  scale. 
While  the  necessities  of  the  state,  or  the  interests  of  party 
leaders  demanded  the  admission  of  entire  communities  to  the 
rights  of  intermarriage  and  commerce,  with  eligi- 
bility to  the  suffrage,  which  were  all  comprehend- 
ed in  the  boon  of  the  Latin  franchise,  little  dispo- 
sition was  shown  to  bestow  on  strangers  the  full 
privileges  of  Quiritary  proprietorship,  which 
gave  not  merely  the  empty  title  of  the  suffrage,  but  the 
precious  immunity  from  tribute  or  land-tax.  Accordingly, 
while  Pompeius,  Caesar,  Augustus  and  others  extended  the 
Latin  rights  to  many  provincial  communities,  they  were 
careful  to  give  the  full  Roman  qualification  to  persons  only.' 


Quiritary  pro- 
prietorship, 
embracing  ex- 
emption from 
the  land-tax, 
reluctantly 
given  by  the 
emperors. 


1 Such  was  their  general  practice.  No  doubt  there  were  exceptions.  Dion 
in  speaking  of  Cassar’s  proceedings,  indicates  the  different  kinds  and  values  ol 
bis  boons : edoice  fiev  x^PLa  KOi  areAeiav,  noTare'cav  re  tlgl, , ical  a/iAxwg  anot 


A.  U.  891.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


410 


Of  such  persons,  indeed,  large  numbers  were  admitted  to 
citizenship  by  the  emperors.  The  full  rights  of  Rome  were 
conferred  on  the  Transalpine  Gauls  by  Claudius,  and  the 
Latin  rights  on  the  Spaniards  by  Vespasian  ; but  it  was  with 
much  reserve  that  any  portions  of  territory  beyond  Italy 
were  enfranchised,  and  rendered  Italic  or  Quiritary  soil,  and 
thus  endowed  with  a special  immunity.1  Thus  the  state  re- 
tained a grasp  on  the  land  with  its  fiscal  liabilities,  while  it 
reaped  a distinct  fiscal  advantage  from  every  personal  en- 
franchisement. Augustus,  as  we  have  seen,  had 


ventured  to  lay  a personal  tax  on  the  citizens  in  17  imP°?ed  011 


The  legacy  du- 
ty imposed  oi 
personal  en- 

the  shape  of  a legacy-duty,  to  counterbalance  lrancMsement- 
their  immunity  from  tribute.  This  tax  was  no  more  than  a 
twentieth,  and  from  it  direct  descendants  were  exempted. 
Nevertheless  certain  peculiarities  in  Roman  society  might 
make  such  a duty  more  productive  than  from  modern  expe- 
rience we  should  expect.  The  exemptions  on  the  ground  of 
lineal  descent  would  be  comparatively  few,  for  the  wealthy 
noble  was  scandalously  averse  to  the  forms  of  legitimate  mar- 
riage : it  gratified  his  vanity,  moreover,  to  inscribe  on  his 
testament  the  names  of  the  great  people  he  numbered  among 
his  friends.  Beset  through  his  declining  years  by  the  legacy- 
hunters,  one  of  the  minor  pests  of  the  Roman  society,  he 
might  too  often  divert  his  posthumous  liberality  from  his 
next  of  kin,  or  even  from  his  children,  if  such  he  had,  to  mere 
aliens  and  strangers.  Whatever  was  the  amount  of  this  tax, 
it  had  the  recommendation  of  being  direct,  and  easily  levied 
under  the  strict  administration  of  Roman  law ; and  accord- 
ingly the  readiness  with  which  the  emperors  imparted  citizen- 
ship is  explained  by  their  eagerness  to  grasp  this  tempting 


kovq  tov  'Fu/mcw  vofi'i&crdai ; sliii.  39.  So  also  in  some  cases  Augustus. 
Suet.  Oct.  47. : “ civitates  merita  erga  pop.  Rom.  allegantes  immunitate  vel 
civitate  donavit.”  Vespasian  gave  the 'Jus  Italicum  to  Stobi,  a town  in  Mace- 
donia. Plin.  Hist.  Hat.  iv.  10.  See  Spanheim,  Orb.  Horn.  p.  153. 

1 The  origin  of  the  Jus  Italicum  is  ascribed  to  Augustus  by  A.  Zurnpt,  fol 
lowed  by  Marquardt  (Becker’s  Rcem.  AlterUi.  iii.  1.  264.).  He  transplanted  the 
eitizens  displaced  by  his  veterans  to  the  provinces,  and  there  endowed  Iheit 
territories  with  the  immunities  of  Italy. 


1 20 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  138. 


booty.  Though  strongly  opposed  in  the  first  instance,  we 
do  not  find  that  the  legacy-duty  caused  audible  murmurs 
among  the  people  when  they  had  become  accustomed  to  it. 
It  was  counted,  however,  among  Trajan’s  merits  that  he  re- 
laxed in  some  degree  its  stringency.  Great  numbers  had 
gained  their  footing  as  Roman  citizens  by  serving  magistra- 
cies in  the  Latin  towns  ; but  the  Roman  rights  to  which  they 
had  attained  were  still  so  far  incomplete,  that  they  had  no 
power  of  deriving  an  untaxed  inheritance  from  their  own 
parents ; for  their  parents  still  remained  under  the  Latin  dis- 
abilities. Hence  the  value  of  citizenship,  thus  burdened  and 
circumscribed,  was  held  in  question  by  the  Latins.1  Nerva 
and  Trajan  decreed  that  these  New  Citizens , as  they  were 
designated,  who  thus  came,  as  it  was  called,  through  Latium , 
should  be  put  on  the  same  advantageous  footing  as  the  old 
and  genuine  class.  In  so  doing  they  made  doubtless  some 
sacrifice,  though  not  perhaps  an  important  one,  of  revenue. 
The  merit  of  the  emperor,  however,  was  esteemed  so  much  the 
greater,  inasmuch  as  the  legacy-duty  was  paid  to  the  fiscus, 
and  not  to  the  public  treasury,  and  was  devoted — such  at 
least  was  the  destination  assigned  it  by  Augustus — to  the 
maintenance  of  the  imperial  armies. 

It  was  the  fiscus,  as  we  see,  that  gained  by  the  succession 
tax ; but  at  the  same  time  the  serarium  lost  by  the  exemption 
Constant  degra-  from  land  tax  conferred  upon  Italic  soil.  The 
character  of6  area  f°  which  this  immunity  was  extended  can- 

fhip  in  the zen’  estimated.  It  seems,  however,  to  have 

provinces.  been  confined,  beyond  the  Alps,  to  specific  dis- 


1 Plin.  Paneff.  37.  Comp.  Spanheim,  Orb.  Rom.  p.  159.:  “ adeo  ut  non 
haberent  ii  jura  cognationis,  nisi  rescriptis  ad  earn  rem  a principe  seorsim  ac- 
ceptis ; sed  quando  filius  succedebat  patri,  succedebat  tanquam  extraneus 
haeres,  soluta  hsereditatis  vicesima.  Nerva,  amplificato  eo  jure,  matrem  in  libe- 
rorum  hsereditate,  et  vicissim  liberos  ac  filium  in  parentis  bonis  ea  immunitate 
perfrui  voluit.  Trajanus  vero  id  benefioium  in  tantum  auxit  ut  sicut  patris 
filius,  ita  in  filii  hsereditate  pater  immunis  esset : turn  ut  frater,  avus,  avia,  nep- 
tis,  nepos,  et  invicem  absque  diminutione  vicesimae  hssredes  esse  possent ; de- 
nique  exiles  hsereditates  ad  quoscunque  hseredes  pertinerent,  immunes  itidem 
fecit.” 


A.  U.  891.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


421 


tricts  appertaining  to  the  colonies,  and  possibly  in  a few 
cases  to  municipia,  and  never  to  have  been  commnnicated  to 
a whole  province,  or  indeed  to  the  lands  of  mere  peregrini .’ 
The  places  thus  endowed  were  such  only  as  were  inhabited 
by  Romans  or  Latins,  by  persons,  that  is,  either  possessing 
the  full  franchise,  or  enjoying  the  capacity  of  acquiring  it. 
But  citizenship  in  the  provinces  must  have  been  in  a state  of 
constant  deterioration  ; for  the  genuine  Roman  could  not 
form  a legitimate  marriage  except  with  a woman  of  his  own 
political  status  ; and  as  these  must  have  been  few  in  the 
provinces  compared  with  the  men,  unions  of  disparagement 
must  have  been  habitually  contracted,  the  offspring  of  which 
could  not  succeed  to  all  their  father’s  privileges.  The  popu- 
lation of  the  colonia  must  thus  have  generally  become  in 
two  or  three  generations  Romans  of  a degenerate  legal  type ; 
though  they  seem  to  have  still  retained  by  some  unexplained 
fiction,  the  name  of  citizens,  and  to  have  enjoyed  some  con- 
ventional superiority  over  the  peregrini. 

Accordingly,  while  the  Italic  exemption  was  imparted  to 
none  who  were  not  already  citizens,  and  therefore  liable,  for 
the  most  part,  to  the  tax  on  succession,  the  cit- 

. .....  , ....  . Gradual  exten- 

lzenship  with  its  attendant  taxability  was  be-  sion  of  cMzen- 

1 . T , . ship  to  all  the 

stowed  on  many  who  enjoyed  no  Italic  exemp-  free  population 

. „ . . A . . . of  the  empire. 

tion  to  set  oft  against  it.  it  became  the  obvious 
interest  of  the  government  to  extend  the  one,  and  to  limit 
the  other.  The  earlier  emperors  had,  indeed,  exercised  a 
jealous  reserve  in  popularizing  the  Roman  privileges ; but 
from  Claudius  downwards  they  seem  to  have  vied  with  one 
another  in  the  facility  with  which  they  conferred  them  as 
a boon,  or  imposed  them  as  a burden.1 2  The  burden  indeed 

1 A few  municipia  in  Spain  and  elsewhere  may  probably  be  enumerated 
among  the  civitates  juris  Italic!  Spanbeim,  Orb.  Rom.  p.  151.  153. 

2 The  practice  of  purchasing  Civitas  was  undoubtedly  common  under 
Claudius,  and  the  price  was  at  first  high  ; but  afterwards  the  emperor’s  freed- 
men  sold  it  for  a trifle  to  stimulate  the  demand.  Dion,  Lx.  17.  Galba  made  a 
great  favour  of  bestowing  it.  Otho  lavished  it  on  the  whole  nation  of  the 
Lingones.  Suet.  Galb.  8.  Tac.  Hist.  i.  78. 


422 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  138, 


might  he  but  trifling.  Direct  succession  was  exempt  from 
the  duty,  the  smallest  successions  were  relieved  from  it,  and 
the  chance  of  an  ample  legacy  from  a stranger  might  hardly 
enter  into  the  calculations  of  the  candidates  for  citizenship. 
But,  on  the  other  hand,  we  can  hardly  comprehend  in  what 
the  boon  could  generally  consist,  except  to  persons  resident 
in  or  near  to  Rome,  who  might  hope  to  share  in  the  honours 
and  offices,  the  distributions  and  largesses,  reserved  for  Ro- 
man citizens.  When  Pliny  is  reduced  to  specify  respect  or 
love  for  the  commonwealth  as  the  ruling  motive  of  such  ap- 
plications, he  would  seem  to  be  really  screening  from  view 
some  baser  or  more  worldly  inducement. 1 W e must  presume 
that  the  resident  in  provinces  acquired  by  citizenship  some 
superiority  over  his  fellow-countrymen.  But,  however  this 
may  be,  great  anxiety  seems  to  have  been  felt  among  large 
classes  to  obtain  enrolment  in  the  ranks  of  Rome.  The  soli- 
citations of  Pliny  to  Trajan  in  the  interest  of  his  personal 
friends  and  clients,  represent  doubtless  the  pressure  which 
was  actually  exerted  on  the  emperor  from  every  side.2  Ha- 
drian was  besieged  as  closely  and  as  constantly  as  his  pre- 
decessor. The  benefactions  of  this  prince  to  the  provinces 
are  signalized  in  general  terms  by  Dion ; and  Spartian  as- 
sures us  that  he  conferred  the  Latin  right  on  several  commu- 
nities, while  he  remitted  tribute  to  others ; an  indulgence 
which  may  perhaps  imply  the  concession  of  the  Jus  Italicum.3 

Antoninus  Pius  is  also  celebrated  on  medals  as  a 

Decree  of  An- 

ton inus  Cara-  Multiplier  of  citizens  • 4 but  neither  Hadrian,  as 
hastily  affirmed  by  St.  Chrysostom,  nor  his  next 

1 Plin.  Paneg.  3V. : “ inveniebantur  tamen  quibus  tantus  amor  nominis 
nostri  inesset,  ut  Romauam  civitatem  non  vicesimae  modo  sed  etiam  affinitatis 
damno  bene  compensatam  putarent ; sed  iis  maxime  debebat  gratuito  contin- 
gere  a quibus  tam  magno  sestimabatur.” 

2 Plin.  Epist.  x.  4.  and  8.  The  writer  solicits  Civitas  for  his  physician 
Harpocras,  an  Egyptian.  I presume  that  had  this  man  been  resident  at  Rome, 
he  would  have  obtained  the  franchise  under  the  ancient  decree  of  Julius  Caesar, 
by  which  the  professors  of  his  and  other  sciences  were  thus  favoured.  Suet 
Jul.  42. 

3 Dion,  Ixix.  5.  Spartian,  Hair.  21. 

* Spanheim,  Orbis  Rom.  p.  169.,  refers  to  a medal  of  Antoninus  in  Goltz’s 


A.  IT.  891. J 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


423 


successor,  as  has  been  inferred  from  a confusion  of  names, 
was  the  author  of  the  decree  by  which  the  Roman  franchise 
was  finally  communicated  to  all  the  subjects  of  the  empire.1 
Whatever  the  progress  of  enfranchisement  may  have  been, 
this  famous  consummation  was  not  effected  till  fifty  years 
after  our  present  date,  by  the  act  of  Antoninus  Caracalla.2 

This  gradual  approximation  of  the  free  races  of  the  em- 
pire to  a common  status  was  the  most  marked  symptom  of 
progress  towards  unity.  The  advances  Hadrian 

1 ° , ,.  ...  ...  Progress  of  tha 

made  to  his  subjects  by  rendering  himselt  acces-  empire  towards 

...  . . uniformity. 

Bible  to  them  at  their  own  doors,  were  answered 
by  a corresponding  advance  on  their  part,  in  the  willingness 
with  which  they  accepted  proffers  of  citizenship,  notwith- 
standing the  drawbacks  attaching  to  it.  The  requirements 
of  the  treasury  were  now  working  in  the  same  direction  in 
other  quarters,  to  enforce  the  principles  of  administrative 
uniformity.  The  distinction  between  the  Imperial  and  Sen- 
atorial provinces  was  still  formally  maintained ; but  the  em- 
perors assumed  more  direct  power  over  the  provinces  of  the 
senate,  with  a view  to  assimilate  legal  procedure  and  taxation 
generally  throughout  the  empire.  While  several  communi- 
ties were  still  suffered  to  retain  the  boon  of  autonomy,  the 
choice  of  their  own  magistrates,  and  the  use  of  their  own  in- 
ternal regulations,  the  privilege,  not  less  dear  to  freemen,  of 
self-taxation  was,  perhaps,  wholly  withdrawn  from  them. 
The  new  name,  which  we  may  render  by  controller,  of  the 
officer  now  appointed  by  the  emperor  to  over-rule  such  local 
administrations,  seems  to  imply  new  functions,  and  these  un- 
doubtedly related  to  the  levy  of  tolls  and  contributions.3 

Thesaurus,  with  the  legend  “ ampliatori  civium,”  and  to  an  inscription,  Grater, 
ccccviii.  1. 

1 S.  Chrysost.  in  Act.  Apost.  xxv.  -.and  'ASpiavov  <paai  tt avrat;  elvai  'P oual- 
ovr  • to  yap  iraXaLov  ovx  ovtos.  See  Spanheim,  Orb.  Rom.  p.  162. 

2 Dion,  lxxvii.  9.  Digest,  i.  5,  de  statu  hominum,  § 17.  Spanheim,  Orbis 
Rom.  p.  196.  The  reign  of  Caracalla  dates  21 1— 21Y.  The  object  of  the  con- 
stitution, it  is  agreed,  was  simply  fiscal. 

3 Pliny  speaks  of  an  extraordinary  commissioner,  “ legatus  Augusti,”  who 
was  sent  “ad  ordinandum  staturn  liberarum  civitatum.”  Rpist.  viii.  24.  Comp, 


i 24 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


fA.D.  138 


Witli  the  assimilation  of  the  subject’s  fiscal  burdens  kept 
pace  the  assimilation  of  the  law  and  procedure  by  which 
The  civil  law  of  he  was  protected  or  coerced.  The  civil  laws  of 
app?ica«ondtof  R°me)  like  her  political  institutions,  had  grown 
tween°forei»n*  11 P 'with  the  commonwealth  itself,  and  applied 
ers-  from  the  first  in  strictness  to  the  mutual  relations 

of  citizens  only.  The  laws  of  the  Twelve  Tables,  the  written 
code  of  the  Republic,  defined  the  rights  of  the  Quirites,  the 
obligations  of  Quiritary  property,  and  the  mode  of  litigation 
in  regard  to  them.  The  Peplies  of  the  learned  patricians, 
who  devoted  themselves  to  expounding  the  law  to  their  ple- 
beian clients,  referred  to  the  interpretation  of  principles  curtly 
set  forth  in  the  written  code,  and  their  application  to  the 
suits  of  Romans  against  Romans  ; but  they  must  have  been 
soon  extended  to  the  solution  of  questions  arising  out  of  the 
dealings  of  citizens  with  sojourners,  and  even  of  sojourners 
with  one  another.  As  regarded  the  tenure  of  property  and 
modes  of  succession,  the  rules  of  Quiritary  possession  were 
clearly  inapplicable  to  provincial  estates,  and  on  these  sub- 
jects, as  well  as  some  others,  the  common  sense  of  the  juris- 
consults was  directed  to  modifying  Roman  principles,  and 
gradually  ventilating  more  general  methods,  under  the  title 
of  the  Jus  Gentium , or  Law  Universal.  Thus  for  instance 
the  Pcitria  Potestas , or  l’ights  of  fathers  over  their  children, 
was  specially  confined  to  full  citizens.  The  Roman  jurists 
boasted  that  in  no  other  community  were  such  excessive 
powers  granted  to  the  father  as  in  theirs ; but  they  did  not 
attempt  to  extend  these  powers  to  their  subjects.  When, 
therefore,  at  Rome  or  in  the  provinces,  questions  of  parental 
right  in  the  case  of  foreigners  came  before  them,  they  were 
reduced  to  look  for  some  other  rule  of  decision  either  in  the 
recognised  law  of  the  applicants’  own  country,  or  in  default 

Pliny’s  own  position  at  Apamea,  x.  92.  Under  Hadrian  Claudius  Herodes  was 
6iopduTi/c,  “ controller,”  of  the  free  states  of  Attica.  Philostr.  Vit.  Sophist.  L 
256.  The  same  officer  seems  to  bear  elsewhere  the  title  of  Juryurrijs,  “ ac- 
countant ; ” and  from  this  designation  we  should  infer  that  his  functions  were 
chiefly  fiscal.  See  Becker’s  Alter Ihumer  (Marquardt),  iii.  1.  67. 


&.U  691.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


425 


of  this,  in  such  a law  as  they  could  themselves  invent  and 
apply  in  accordance  with  their  own  sense  of  simple  justice. 

When,  however,  all  Italy  became  Quiritary  soil,  and  the 
Italians  generally  had  accepted  the  status  of  Roman  citizens, 
fewer  cases  of  conflicting  principle  would  occur  Anomalous  re- 
in  the  courts  of  the  city-praetor,  and  there  might  j^cfvnVami 
have  been  no  incongruity  in  enforcing  there  the  tufa^n  th™" 
civil  law  in  all  its  strictness.  But  in  fact,  the  Flayian  era- 
ideas  of  the  Romans  had  mellowed  with  their  fortunes,  and 
they  had  become  anxious  to  soften  the  harshest  features,  and 
expand  the  narrowest  views  of  their  law,  after  coming  in 
contact  with  the  riper  and  milder  notions  of  Greeks  and  Asi- 
atics. Slow  and  obscure  was  the  process  by  which  the  stiff 
lines  of  the  Becemviral  code  were  rounded  into  the  flowing 
lineaments  of  Justinian’s  Institutes.  On  the  progress  which 
had  been  made  in  this  direction  in  the  last  stage  of  the  repub 
lie,  when  the  status  of  citizen  and  subject  was  still  strongly 
defined  and  contrasted,  much  light  is  thrown  in  the  writings 
of  Cicero  ; but  three  centuries  pass  before  the  sun  again  rises 
in  the  Institutes  of  Gaius,  and  then  the  distinction  of  citizen 
and  subject  has  become  nearly  obliterated.1  At  the  period 
we  are  now  considering,  the  two  conditions  were  dissolving 
into  one  another ; but  what  were  the  relations  of  the  law  of 
the  Roman  and  the  law  of  the  foreigner,  or  what  the  charac- 
ter and  application  of  the  Jus  Gentium  or  universal  law, 
which  seems  to  have  moderated  between  them,  we  can  but 
faintly  conjecture.2 

1 Gaius,  however,  still  retains  the  former  distinction  of  cives  Romani,  La- 
tini  and  Dediticii.  Instit.  i.  3. 

2 The  distinction  between  the  Jus  Civile  and  Jus  Gentium  is  stated  by 
Gaius  near  the  beginning  of  the  third  century.  Instit.  i.  1.  1.  (cited  in  the  Di- 
gest. i.  1.  9.):  “omnes  populi  qui  legibus  et  moribus  reguntur,  partim  £io  pro 
prio  partim  communi  omnium  hominum  jureutuntur.  Nam  quod  quisque  popu 
li.s  ipse  sibi  jus  eonstituit,  id  ipsius  proprium  est,  vocaturque  jus  civile,  quasi 
jus  proprium  ipsius  civitatis : quod  vero  naturalis  ratio  inter  omnes  homines 
eonstituit,  id  apud  omnes  populos  peraeque  custoditur,  vocaturque  jus  gentium, 
quasi  quo  jure  omnes  gentes  utuntur.  Populus  itaque  Rom.  partim  suo  proprio, 
partim  communi  omnium  hominum  jure  utitur.” 


426 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.D.  138. 


The  great  instrument  by  which  the  assimilation  of  law 
was  conducted  was  the  Jus  Honorarium , or  official  edict  of 
The  jus  Tiono-  the  chief  judicial  magistrates  of  Rome.1  Year 
Perpetua? Edict  ^}r  year  the  praetors  and  pecliles,  on  commencing 
of  the  prsetor.  their  term  of  office,  published  the  formula  by 
which  they  proposed  to  regulate  their  administration  of  jus- 
tice. This  edict,  originally  inscribed  on  a whited  tablet,  and 
suspended  in  a public  place,  must  have  been,  in  the  first  in- 
stance, a short  and  simple  document,  setting  forth  the  recog- 
nised sources  of  the  written,  with  some  leading  principles  of 
unwritten  law  and  procedure.  We  may  suppose  that  in 
later  times,  when  the  accumulation  of  laws,  decisions  and  in- 
terpretations had  become  excessive,  the  edict  directed  the 
reader  to  the  accredited  legal  experts  whom  the  judge  pro- 
fessed to  adopt  as  his  guides.  In  the  existing  conflict  of  law 
and  usage,  the  litigant  would  require  direction  as  to  the 
course  the  bench  proposed  to  follow,  and  the  bench  would  be 
glad  to  shelter  itself  under  established  precedents  and  au- 
thorities.2 While  in  the  city  two  prsetors  dis- 

Tho  provincial  ....  . 

edict  of  the  pensed  the  law,  the  one  to  the  citizens,  the  other 
to  foreign  residents,  the  prefect  in  the  provinces 
administered  justice  to  both  classes,  and  hence  the  Provincial 
Edict  which  he  promulgated  was  founded  from  an  early  date 
on  a fusion  of  Roman  and  foreign  principles.  We  may  sup- 
pose, indeed,  that  in  the  refined  communities  of  the  East, 

1 Digest,  i.  1.  T.  from  Papinian : “jus  prsetorium  est  quod  praetores  intro- 
duxerunt,  adjuvandi  vel  supplendi  vel  corrigendi  juris  eivilis  gratia,  propter 
utilitatem  publicam;  quod  et  honorarium  dicitur,  ad  honorem  prastorum  sic 
nominatum.”  Comp.  Dig.  i.  1.  2.  10. 

2 The  Edict  was  called  “ perpetuum,”  as  destined  to  he  in  force  through  tho 
prastor’s  year  of  office.  Dion,  xxxvi.  23.  Heinecc.  Antiqu.  Rom.  Jurispr.  i.  2. 
23.  Under  Hadrian  Salvius  Julianus  is  specified  as  having  compiled  (compo- 
suit)  a “ perpetual  edict.”  Eutrop.  viii.  9.  This  compilation  is  referred  to  by 
Justinian,  and  seems  to  have  been  sometimes  known  as  the  “ Edict  of  Ha- 
drian.” The  nature  of  this  edict  is  open  to  question ; there  seems,  however, 
no  reason  to  suppose  that  it  constituted  a complete  or  permanent  code ; nor 
has  Hadrian  any  claim  to  be  regarded  as  a great  Roman  legislator.  Hugo, 
Hist.  Droit.  Rom.  § 311.  I refer  to  the  French  translation. 


A..  U.  891.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


427 


familiar  with  the  philosophy  of  jurisprudence,  the  prefect  al- 
lowed full  weight  to  the  local  law,  and  subjected  his  own 
notions,  derived  from  the  Roman  forum,  to  considerable  mod- 
ification. Among  the  ruder  populations  of  the  West,  how- 
ever, there  would  be  less  occasion  for  such  accommodation, 
and  the  magistrate  would  inflict  Quiritary  law  on  the  Gauls 
and  Britons  in  almost  all  its  stringency.  In  either  case  the 
provincial  edict  would  refer,  perhaps,  solely  to  the  cases 
which  came  under  the  cognisance  of  the  prefect  himself.1 

This  high  officer  belonged  to  the  class  of  Roman  nobility, 
of  which  every  member  was  supposed  to  be  generally  ac- 
quainted with  legal  principles,  though  he  might  Methods  and 
in  few  instances  have  acquired  a special  legal  procedure  in 
education.  He  came  to  his  important  post  with  the  provinces, 
a multiplicity  of  functions  to  perform,  and  with  little  or  no 
practical  experience  of  the  law  which  he  was  required  to  ad- 
minister. Under  these  circumstances  he  was  not  expected 
to  act  wholly  for  himself.  The  prefect  having  set  forth  his 
programme,  with  the  aid,  doubtless,  of  professional  advisers, 
summoned  learned  assessors  to  his  aid,  or  appointed  judges 
in  each  particular  case  before  him.  To  facilitate  the  ends  of 
justice,  he  made  a circuit  through  the  chief  towns  of  his  prov- 
ince, assembling  in  each  the  conventus  of  the  district,  and 
selecting  from  among  the  delegates  persons  whom  he  deemed 
fit  to  hear  causes  in  his  name.  These  select  judges  were  not 
permitted  to  decline  the  office  ; and  indeed  it  was  chiefly  in 
order  to  supply  the  prefect  with  such  assistance,  that  the  com 
ventus  was  summoned.  It  appears  also  that  these  judges 
were  chosen  from  Roman  citizens  or  from  provincials  accord 
mg  as  the  suitors  desired  to  be  ruled  by  Roman  law,  or  by 
the  special  customs  of  their  own  province.  In  important 
cases  the  prefect  might  refer  his  suitors  to  the  emperor  at 
Rome ; and  he  was  assisted  by  several  deputies  or  substi  > 
tutes,  to  Avhom,  at  least  in  private  cases,  he  might  remit  his 

1 See  Pliny’s  letter  (Ejrist.  x.  74.),  where  he  consults  Trajan  on  a point  re- 
garding which  he  finds  that  there  exists  no  general  law  for  the  empire,  nor  one 
."or  his  own  province.  Trajan  makes  a special  decree  for  the  occasion. 


i2S 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  I).  138 


jurisdiction;  and  these  deputies  also,  being  often  untrained 
in  legal  science,  obtained  the  aid  of  professional  assessors.1 

The  jurisdiction  of  the  prefect  extended  to  criminal  as 
well  as  civil  causes.  The  trial  was  conducted  publicly  in  the 

forum  of  the  provincial  capital.  The  judges. 

Relations  of  1 . 1 J ° ’ 

Roman  anti  who  sate  by  the  prefect  s side,  were  chosen  from 

native  usage.  ...  , , 

the  ranks  oi  the  provincials,  and  these  gave  to 
the  accused  the  benefit  in  some  degree  of  judgment  by  his 
own  countrymen.  There  seems  to  be  no  mention  in  the 
Codes  of  any  courts  of  first  instance  but  such  as  were  com- 
missioned by  the  prefect : we  can  hardly  doubt,  however, 
that  the  police  of  the  villages,  the  adjudication  of  small 
debts  and  other  cases  of  petty  wrong,  must  have  been  left  to 
the  summary  jurisdiction  of  native  authorities,  at  least  hi 
the  remoter  districts.  Beneath  the  action  of  Roman  courts 
and  procedure  there  must  have  long  existed  a native  law  and 
native  usage,  which  only  gradually  gave  way  to  the  exten- 
sion of  Roman  machinery.2  It  must  be  remembered  that  our 

1 Sigonius  De  jure  pr ovine,  ii.,  in  Grsev.  Thesaur.  tom.  ii.  The  great  source 
of  our  knowledge  of  these  matters  in  the  pre-imperial  period  is  the  Verrine 
orations.  I cannot  quit  this  subject  without  acknowledging  the  advantage  I 
have  derived  from  Mr.  Maine’s  interesting  volume  on  “ Ancient  Law,”  and  still 
more,  perhaps,  from  personal  intercourse  with  him. 

2 The  administration  of  law  in  the  Roman  provinces  has  been  well  illus- 
trated from  that  in  British  India  in  some  papers  in  the  Bombay  Quarterly  Mag. 
1853,  attributed  to  Sir  Erskine  Perry.  Our  provinces  have  been  divided  into 
two  classes,  the  Regulation  and  the  Non-Regulation.  The  latter  class  comprises 
generally  the  latest  acquisitions,  in  which  there  has  been  less  opportunity  for 
amending  the  native  organization  according  to  British  ideas.  Here,  as  under 
the  Roman  system,  the  judicial  and  executive  functions  are  lodged  for  the  most 
part  in  the  same  hands,  subject  to  the  general  control  of  the  central  govern- 
ment. The  judges  are  not  lawyers  by  profession.  They  have  been  trained  as 
fiscal  or  military  officers,  and  when  deputed  to  sit  on  the  tribunals,  they  require 
the  aid  of  assessors,  mostly  natives,  whom,  however,  they  have  full  authority  to 
overrule.  This,  it  is  said,  is  the  system,  rude  and  wrongful  as  it  seems  to  us, 
which  most  recommends  itself  to  the  native  mind,  accustomed  as  it  is  to  bow 
to  power,  and  insensible  to  the  principles  of  scientific  jurisprudence.  But  since 
s Mention  at  home  has  been  called  to  th  e duties  of  a conquering  race,  we  have 
felt  our  obligation  to  give  our  subjects  a better  system  than  their  own,  and  raise 


A.  U.  891.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


429 


existing  documents  inform  us  only  of  tlie  state  of  the  civil 
law  after  the  whole  empire  had  been  reduced  to  a homoge- 
neous mass : it  may  be  presumed,  however,  that  the  princi- 
ples of  uniformity  had  gained  no  such  ascendancy  in  the  pe- 
riod which  we  are  now  considering.  Among  the  various 
races  which  obeyed  the  imperial  sword,  various  in  temper  as 
well  as  in  condition,  we  may  suppose  that  these  principles 
were  variously  appreciated ; that  the  Gauls  and  Germans 
advanced  in  them  more  dubiously  and  slowly  than  the 
Greeks  and  Asiatics.  The  intervention  of  technical  forms, 
and  of  the  class  of  agents  appropriate  to  them,  was  resented 
as  a grievance  by  the  subjects  of  Yarus;  just  as  in  many 
pai’ts  of  India,  at  this  day,  the  character  of  judge  and  ruler 
is  held  to  be  identical,  and  any  attempt  to  separate  their 
functions  is  distasteful  and  liable  to  misconstruction.  The 
education  of  the  world  in  the  principles  of  a sound  jurispru- 
dence was  the  most  wonderful  work  of  the  Roman  conquer- 
ors. It  was  complete  ; it  was  universal ; and  in  permanence 
it  has  far  outlasted,  at  least  in  its  distant  results,  the  dura- 
tion of  the  empire  itself. 

But,  unfortunately,  education  in  jurisprudence  is  not  edu 

their  intelligence  to  appreciate  it.  Accordingly,  the  greater  part  of  our  posse? 
sions  have  been  put  “ for  the  last  sixty  or  seventy  years  ” under  Regulation. 
The  judicial  and  executive  are  completely  separated.  The  judges  of  the  Su- 
preme Court  are  sent  out  fi’om  England,  appointed  by  the  Crown,  and  sit  as  a 
court  of  appeal  in  the  capitals  of  the  Presidencies ; beneath  them  are  a dis- 
tinct class  of  English  judges,  dispersed  throughout  the  country  stations,  trained 
by  practice  if  not  by  technical  education,  to  administer  an  imperfect  code  of 
native  law,  tempered  by  English  principles,  and  the  application  of  their  own 
good  sense ; and  finally  there  is  a large  establishment  of  native  officers,  who 
dispense  justice  in  the  native  fashion,  after  the  native  laws  and  customs,  subject 
only  to  appeals  to  the  European  courts  above  them.  This  system,  however,  as 
described  ten  years  ago,  is  undergoing  constant  modification,  and  the  impend- 
ing promulgation  of  a Code,  applying  to  both  natives  and  Europeans,  -will  com- 
plete the  analogy  between  our  judicial  organization  and  that  of  the  provinces 
of  the  Lower  Empire ; except  that  the  emperors  seem  to  the  last  to  have  with- 
held from  their  subjects  the  boon,  indispensable  we  should  deem  it,  of  a Su- 
preme Court  independent  of  the  resident  executive,  and  responsible  to  the  sov- 
ereign only. 


430 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  138. 


cation  in  freedom ; generally  speaking  it  is  much  the  reverse. 
Decline  of  pub-  The  most  comprehensive,  exact  and  logical  codes. 

lie  spirit  coin-  x ° ’ 

cident  with  the  from  Justinian  downwards,  have  been  the  actual 

perfection  of  . . 

jurisprudence,  badges  oi  national  servitude  and  degradation. 
The  disgust  of  the  Germans  at  the  niceties  of  Roman  law 
aud  procedure  was  the-  instinct  of  freemen,  looking  to  broad 
practical  results,  and  despising  the  intellectual  attractions  of 
form  and  harmony.  The  development  of  an  exact  and  philo- 
sophical jurisprudence  in  the  empire  kept  pace  with  the  de- 
cline of  public  spirit,  and  the  decay  of  self-respect  and  self- 
assertion.  The  body-politic  became  an  admirable  machine, 
but  life  and  soul  were  wanting  to  it.  Such  was  the  languor 
that  was  stealing  over  Roman  society  at  the  period  of  its 
greatest  brilliancy,  and  its  highest  culture.  Such  was  the 
stagnation  which,  in  spite  of  material  and  even  moral  im- 
provement on  all  sides ; in  spite  of  culminating  science, 
of  wide-spread  art,  of  milder  manners  and  expanding  hu- 
manity ; in  spite  even  of  spiritual  yearning,  was  beginning 
to  paralyse  the  Roman  world  in  the  age  of  the  Antonines. 
The  channel,  indeed,  sloped  so  gradually,  that  the  direction 
of  the  current  was  hardly  perceptible  so  long  as  nothing 
occurred  to  break  and  agitate  it.  But  its  downward  couisj 
was  made  fully  apparent  on  the  first  political  catastrophe. 
The  disasters  of  the  reign  of  Aurelius,  to  be  presently  re- 
lated, revealed  to  all  observers  the  weakness  of  the  empire, 
and  showed  but  too  plainly  that  it  possessed  no  vital  power 
of  rebound  and  recovery. 

Meanwhile  even  the  outward  uniformity  impressed  on  the 
Roman  world  had  no  effect  in  creating  a nation.  The  por- 
tions of  the  mighty  structure  have  been  compared 

Uniformity  . ° J . , 1 . 

without  amai-  to  mosaic  work.  Bach  province,  each  district, 
almost  every  town  was  distinct  from  all  the  rest, 
and  at  first  not  only  distinct  but  different,  like  the  several 
pieces  of  a variegated  tessellation,  such  as  adorned  the  palace 
of  a prince  or  senator.1  Ultimately  they  were  reduced  to  a 


1 Dubois-Guchan,  Tacite  et  son  Siecle , i.  56T. 


A.U.  891.] 


UJSDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


431 


single  type  ; they  were  all  of  one  shape,  size  and  colour,  like 
the  flooring  of  a plebeian  cottage ; hut  still  they  remained 
separate  and  distinct  one  from  another.  There  was  uniform- 
ity without  amalgamation.  In  an  earlier  chapter  I have 
shown  how  the  various  districts  of  each  province  were  pur- 
posely estranged  and  kept  apart ; how  the  system  of  local 
organization  worked  in  making  each  dependent  upon  Rome, 
hut  all  mutually  independent.  Hence  the  mass  of  the  em- 
peror’s subjects  could  form  no  political  body  to  act  spontane- 
ously for  his  interests.  They  were  moved  as  counters  by  the 
hands  of  a central  government,  and  employed,  often  blindly 
and  ignorantly,  for  the  creation,  or  at  least  for  the  extortion 
of  material  wealth.  The  producers  of  the  empire  were  sub- 
jected to  the  control  and  fiscal  manipulation  of  Roman 
officials,  and  these  officials  were  still,  as  in  earlier  times,  the 
magnates  of  the  capital,  the  knights,  the  nobles,  and  espe- 
cially the  senators  of  Rome. 

III.  The  position  of  the  nobility  and  the  senate  has  been 
reviewed  more  than  once  in  this  work,  at  several  crises  of 
our  history.  Let  us  once  more  turn  our  eyes 
upon  it,  as  it  stood  in  the  age  of  the  Flavians  and  an<?nobmty.e 
the  Antonines,  under  the  fostering  care  of  its  im- 
perial patrons.  If  Yespasian,  Trajan,  Hadrian,  Antoninus 
are  the  most  virtuous,  the  most  able,  the  most  successful  of 
the  Caesars,  the  secret,  as  our  authorities  insinuate,  of  their 
eminence  lay  in  the  favour  in  which  they  held  the  most 
august  order  of  the  citizens.  It  is  by  senators,  or  by  the 
clients  of  senators,  that  our  history  has  been  entirely  written ; 
it  will  be  interesting  to  examine  what  was  the  real  amount 
of  the  influence  or  power  thus  conferred  upon  the  body  which 
has  so  warmly  acknowledged  it. 

The  old  traditions  of  the  free  state,  which  confined  to 
senators  the  curule  and  other  high  magistracies,  were  still 
religiously  maintained.  It  was  only  to  the  new 

. ,,  Circumstances 

classes  oi  office,  directly  attached  to  the  imperial  which  gave  a 

• 11  e . show  of  im- 

service,  such  as  the  prefecture  of  the  city,  and  com-  portance  to  tho 

mand  in  the  prsetorium  or  the  palace,  that  knights 


432 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  138. 


and  inferior  citizens  could  be  appointed.  These  posts  were 
indeed  lucrative  and  important,  and  the  nobles  deeply 
grudged  the  good  fortune  of  the  upstarts  who  obtained  them  , 
but  they  were  regarded  as  emanating  from  the  prince’s  mere 
caprice,  as  pertaining  to  his  personal  affairs,  as  touching 
closely  upon  menial  service,  and  the  magnates  could  pretend 
at  least  to  despise  them.  The  consuls  indeed  were  themselves 
nominated  directly  by  the  emperor : 1 but  the  consulship  was 
_ . ..  . „ still  illustrious  for  its  name  and  traditions,  and 

Dignity  of  the 

consulship.  not  only  the  consulship  which  gave  name  to  the 
Inferior  magis-  1 ° 

trates  elected  year,  but  tile  supplemental  and  honorary  distinc- 
by  the  senate.  . . . , , 1 % , J 

tion  which  bore  the  name  only,  continued  to  be 
an  object  of  the  highest  ambition.2 3  Even  the  empty  badge 
of  the  consular  ornaments,  now  lavishly  bestowed,  was 
prized  and  sought  for.  The  praetors,  tediles  and  quaestors  en- 
joyed a show  at  least  of  free  election  by  the  senate  ; and  this 
distinction  may  have  tended  to  enhance  their  credit.  The 
enactments  regarding  the  mode  of  voting  at  these  elections, 
at  one  time  open,  at  another  secret,  show  that  some  real  im- 
portance attached  to  them.s  At  the  beginning  of  Trajan’s 
reign  the  practice  of  open  suffrage  was  in  use.  Old  men  in 
Pliny’s  time  remembered  the  gravity  with  which  this  digni- 
fied procedure  had  been  invested,  and  their  testimony,  we 
must  suppose,  referred  to  the  practice  under  Claudius  or 
Nero.  Each  candidate  was  required  to  declare  the  grounds 
of  his  pretensions  in  the  face  of  the  senate.  He  recounted  his 
life  and  actions,  his  offices  and  his  honours ; his  friends  were 
summoned  to  attest  his  merits.  They  spoke  briefly,  and  the 

1 Trajan,  indeed,  is  said  to  have  remitted  these  elections  to  the  senate.  Plin. 
Paneg.  65. : “ Consules  fecit  quos  vos  elegeratis.” 

2 The  substitution  of  consuls  for  a part  of  the  year  was  an  irregularity  in- 
troduced by  the  first  Csesar.  Augustus  adopted  and  systematized  it.  It  seems 
that  down  to  the  time  of  Vespasian  the  term  of  office  was  ordinarily  sis 
months.  From  Vespasian  to  Hadrian  it  was  reduced  to  four  months,  and  the 
Antocines  limited  it  to  three.  This  rule  is  said  to  have  been  ascertained  by 
Borghesi,  the  great  epigraphist  of  San  Marino,  lately  deceased.  See  Noel  des 
Vergers,  Essai  sur  M.  Aurele,  p.  86. 

3 Plin.  Epist.  iii.  20.,  iv.  25. 


A.  U.  891.] 


UNHER  THE  EMPIRE. 


433 


fathers  listened  with  censorial  gravity.  But  in  later  times 
this  usage  had  degenerated  into  a contest  of  loudness,  vehe- 
mence and  impudence;  the  claimants  trusted  more  to  en- 
treaties than  to  merit,  more  doubtless  to  bribery  than  to 
either.  Trajan  enacted  laws  to  check  bribery;1 2  but  the  sen- 
ate, impatient  at  the  confusion  which  prevailed  in  its 
elections,  insisted  with  one  voice  on  striking  at  the  root  of 
these  evils  by  resorting  to  the  secret  ballot,  which  was  re- 
commended by  the  usage  of  the  republic,  and  had  found  pa- 
trons among  the  highest  authorities  of  the  free  state.’  Amid 
the  fierce  selfishness,  however,  of  the  falling  Republic,  the 
ballot  had  been  found  intolerable  ; in  the  feebler  corruption 
of  the  Empire  some  of  its  minor  inconveniences  soon  called 
for  reprehension.  Pliny,  who  had  been  among  the  first  to 
invoke  it,  was  no  less  prompt  to  complain  of  it.  The 
electors  inscribed  trifling  and  even  ribald  jokes  on  their  bal- 
lots. The  insulted  senators  had  no  remedy  but  to  solicit  the 
prince's  anger  against  the  unknown  delinquents.  But  proba- 
bly, Pliny  adds,  the  delinquents  themselves  were  among  the 
loudest  in  pretending  indignation.  What  can  you  expect  in 
private  life  from  one  who  will  act  so  scandalously  in  a grave 
matter  ; who  will  dare  to  joke  and  banter  in  the  senate?  The 
bad  man  cares  not  what  he  does,  for,  Who  will  know  it? 
He  asks  for  his  ticket , he  takes  his  stylus,  he  puts  down  his 
head,  he  cares  for  no  man,  he  has  no  respect  for  himself.  . . 
. . Our  vices  are  too  potent  for  our  remedies .s  This  vehe- 
mence is  indeed  somewhat  beyond  the  occasion,  and  seems 
to  reflect  on  the  political  capacity  of  the  writer  who  allows 
himself  to  indulge  in  it.  The  interest  of  the  account  lies 
chiefly  in  the  view  it  gives  us  of  the  importance  still  attached 
to  the  appointment  to  senatorial  oflices. 

1 Plin.  Epist.  vi.  19. 

2 Cicero,  in  the  speech  Be  Leg.  Agrar.  i.  2.,  had  called  the  ballot,  “ vindex 
tacitae  libertatis.”  This  was  the  sentiment  he  thought  fit  to  express  on  a popu- 
lar occasion ; but  his  philosophical  view  of  the  subject  was  different.  See  Zb 
l£g.  iii.  6.:  “tabella  vitiosum  occultabat  suffragium.” 

* Plin.  Epist.  iv.  25. 

1 34  von.  vii. — 


134 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  13S. 


Yet  the  consulship  was  in  fact  a mere  pageant : the  prae- 
tors and  sediles  were  simply  the  ministers  of  the  imperial 

legislation.  But  the  Augustan  division  of  the 

Government  of  ° . ° 

the  provinces  provinces  between  the  emperor  and  the  senate 

by  senators.  . 

still  existed.  I he  assignment  of  the  various  pre- 
fectures was  almost  the  same  as  that  established  by  the 
founder  of  the  empire.  The  senate  still  governed  the  interior 
provinces  by  proconsuls  chosen  from  its  own  order.  Each 
of  these  magistrates  was  endowed  with  a competent  salary, 
and  extensive  patronage,  which  he  distributed  among  the 
friends  of  his  own  colleagues.  These  advantages  were  indeed 
enjoyed  in  subjection  to  the  caprice  of  the  emperor,  who  often 
interfered  to  annul  the  senatorial  appointment,  to  retain  a 
favourite  at  his  post  beyond  the  legitimate  period,  or  events 
assume  for  a time  the  government  of  the  province  itself.  Nor 
were  the  chiefs  of  the  state  unwilling  to  listen  to  complaints 
against  the  senatorial  officers.  The  oppressed  might  submit 
their  wrongs  to  the  very  body  from  which  their  oppressors 
had  been  selected,  and  the  senate  was  compelled  to  hearken 
to  them,  and  even  to  assign  them  the  advocates  whom  they 
demanded.1  The  Roman  people,  in  the  person  of  their  im- 
perial tribune,  presided  at  the  trial  of  extortionate  procon- 
suls, and  listened  with  favour  to  declamations  fashioned  on 
the  model  of  the  Yerrine  orations.  Pliny  speaks  Avith  com- 
placency of  his  engagement  to  the  provincials  of  Africa  and 
Bajtica,  to  prosecute  the  governors  from  whose  tyranny  they 
had  suffered,  and  he  quickened  the  justice  of  the  senatorial 
tribunal  by  statements  of  the  violence  practised  upon  Roman 
citizens.  Csecilius,  a consular,  one  of  the  delinquents,  with- 
drew himself  from  judgment  by  suicide,  and  Marius  Priscus 

1 Plin.  Epist  ii.  11.;  iv.  4.:  x.  10.  Pliny  and  Tacitus  were  appointed 
(Jussi)  to  plead  for  the  Africans,  by  a senatus-consuPum.  The  trial  of  Marius 
took  place  a.  d.  100,  at  the  beginning  of  Trajan’s  reign.  Pliny  accused  Bsebius 
Massa  in  9?,  under  Domitian.  Tac.  Agric.  45.  On  other  occasions  he 
appeared  for  the  defence,  as  in  the  case  of  Julius  Bassus,  and  Yarenus 
Epist.  vi.  29. 


A.  U.  891.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


435 


was  sentenced  to  fine  and  banishment.1  The  fathers  were 
not  suffered  to  regard  themselves  as  above  the  law  ; nor  do 
they  seem  to  have  unduly  resented  the  vigour  with  which 
even  their  patrons  among  the  emperors  brought  the  most 
criminal  among  them  to  the  bar  of  public  opinion. 

Notwithstanding  its  manifest  weakness,  however,  the 
senate,  dazzled  by  the  splendour  of  its  reputed  dignity,  con- 
tinued to  cherish  the  traditions  of  its  ancient 

. . The  pride  of 

power.  The  feeling  which  animated  it  has  been  the  senate 

1 . . maintained  by 

preserved  in  the  most  glowing  pages  of  the  most  its  usages  and 

, n , r . , . . traditions. 

eloquent  oi  the  Romans ; the  national  imagina- 
tion, which  elsewhere  displays  itself  in  various  forms  of  poet- 
ical invention,  seems  at  Rome  to  have  brooded  on  the  past 
glories  of  the  great  national  council.  The  senate,  in  its  cul- 
minating period,  had  been  an  oligarchy  of  which  all  the  mem- 
bers were  equal.  The  action  of  each  was  subjected  to  con- 
ventional rules.  Every  step,  tone,  or  look  in  the  assembly 
was  governed  by  the  usage  of  centuries,  and  by  prejudices 
founded  in  the  national  veneration  for  antiquity.  The  con- 
script fathers  were  trained  like  soldiers  to  obey  the  word  of 
command,  delivered  by  their  officers  in  the  tone  of  persuasion, 
and  they  moved  from  one  side  of  the  curia  to  the  other, 
cheered  or  voted,  in  deference  to  signs  understood  among 
them,  with  a precision  which  might  be  envied  by  the  tacti- 
cians of  a British  parliament.  The  chiefs  of  factions  had 
well-defined  positions  ; the  prince,  the  consuls,  the  tribunes, 
the  consulars  all  exercised  a direct  sway  within  their  own 
sphere,  more  like  the  authority  of  colonels  or  centurions,  than 
the  precarious  influence  of  our  greatest  party  leaders.  Hence 
the  senate,  whatever  personal  independence  its  members 
might  claim,  had  long  been  subjected,  as  a body,  to  almost 

1 Flin.  11.  cc.  Juvenal,  i.  47. ; viii.  25.  120.,  who,  however,  insinuates  that 
the  victims  of  these  energetic  proceedings,  like  Milo  at  Massilia,  had  little 
reason  to  bewail  their  sufferings : “ Exul  ab  octava  Marius  bibit : et  fruitur  Dis 
Iratis ; at  tu,  victrix  provincia,  ploras.”  Juvenal  seems  also  to  indicate  the 
frequency  of  such  accusations  at  this  period ; but  the  names  of  Pansa  and 
Natta,  which  he  introduces,  are  supposed  to  be  fictitious. 


136 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  188 


despotic  command.  In  tranquil  times,  when  the  supremacy 
of  the  nobles  was  uncontested,  it  might  respect  as  its  patron 
a Scipio  or  a Catulus  ; but  in  periods  of  excitement,  when  its 
prerogatives  were  assailed,  when  the  knights  were  demand- 
ing a share  in  its  monopolies,  or  the  provincials  clamouring 
for  equal  justice,  a Sulla  or  Pompeius  was  the  champion  to 
whom  it  turned,  and  it  was  troubled  by  no  apprehension  of 
the  sword  under  which  it  placed  itself.  It  might  have 
shrunk  indeed  from  the  prospect  of  this  armed  sway  being 
indefinitely  prolonged ; but  Sulla  had  voluntarily  abdicated, 
Pompeius  had  consented  to  exchange  bis  authority  in  the 
city  for  empire  in  the  provinces ; the  fortune  of  the  republic, 
or  its  own,  possibly  in  the  last  resort  the  daggers  of  tyran- 
nicides, might  abridge  the  date  of  too  protracted  a sov- 
ereignty. 

Such  was  the  senatorial  theory  of  constitutional  govern- 
ment ; as  such  it  was  understood  by  Lucan  and  Tacitus. 

They  asked  only,  did  the  existing;  imperial  sys- 

The  senate  J J ’ . . . ° 1 J 

triumphs  over  tern  correspond  with  the  spirit  ot  this  theory  ? 

the  freedmen.  . , 

was  the  emperor  a prince  or  a tyrant ; the  elect 
of  the  senate,  or  a military  usurper  ? Was  he  the  champion  of 
the  nobles  in  the  face  of  the  legions,  the  people  and  the  prov- 
inces ; or  was  he  a mere  selfish  upstart,  using  all  classes  for 
his  own  greed  or  ambition  ? In  descent,  in  character,  in  per- 
son, did  his  preeminence  betoken  the  choice  and  favour  of 
the  Gods  ? If  such  were  his  claims,  the  usage  of  a century 
and  a half  might  reconcile  the  sturdiest  republicans  to  the 
principle  of  a life-tenure.  Augustus  had  humoured  their 
scruples  by  the  show  of  periodical  resignation  and  reappoint- 
ment ; but  this  farce  was  not  repeated  by  his  successors ; 
from  Yespasian  to  Antoninus,  the  best  and  most  honoured  of 
the  Caesars  pretended  to  no  such  overstrained  moderation.1 
Though  the  chiefs  of  the  state  still  retained  the  tribunitian 

1 The  emperors  who  reigned  long  enough  continued  to  celebrate  “ Decen- 
lialia,”  and  to  strike  medals,  on  the  conclusion  of  each  tenth  year  of  their 
principate.  Thus  we  have  coins  of  Antoninus  Pius  with  the  legend,  “ primi 
iecennales ; ” others  with,  “ vot.  sol.  decemi.  ii.” 


A.U.  891.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


43V 


power,  and  counted  the  years  of  their  reign  from  the  day  that 
they  acquired  it,  the  functions  it  symbolized  had  lost  in  the 
second  century  all  political  meaning.  The  struggle  between 
Rome  and  Italy,  between  Italy  and  the  provinces,  between 
the  senators  and  the  knights,  the  struggle  for  the  Judiciaand 
the  emoluments  of  office  abroad,  had  all  passed  away.  The 
senate  retained  indeed,  as  we  have  seen,  some  political  ad- 
vantages ; but  it  was  a senate  so  often  renewed  by  fresh  in- 
fusions, so  freely  percolated  by  the  blood  of  the  lower  classes, 
that  the  old  jealousies  had  lost  their  force,  and  the  feuds  of 
the  republic  had  been  pacified.  Against  one  class  only  of 
their  fellow-subjects,  the  freedmen,  especially  those  of  the  im- 
perial household,  did  the  senate  cherish  a grudge ; a class 
small  in  number,  but  formidable  from  its  wealth,  from  its 
favour  with  then-  common  master,  from  its  opportunities  of 
intruding  into  places  of  trust  and  power.  Against  this  class 
it  still  held  a hostile  attitude ; it  assailed  it  with  ridicule, 
with  defiance,  with  appeals  to  the  prejudices  of  the  people 
and  the  fears  of  the  prince ; and  when  it  gained  at  last  the 
prince’s  ear,  there  was  no  claim  it  so  strongly  urged,  as  that 
his  freedmen  should  be  discountenanced  and  their  influence 
abated.  This  was  the  single  triumph  which  the  senate  ob- 
tained from  Vespasian  and  Trajan  ; and  for  this  it  lavished 
on  them  its  loudest  praises,  and  vowed  that  the  days  of  equal- 
ity and  liberty  had  once  more  returned.  The  secular  contest 
of  the  Patres  and  the  Plebs,of  the  Optimates  and  the  Tribunes, 
finally  died  away  in  the  disgrace  of  a score  or  two  of  upstart 
foreigners.1 

1ST  or  must  we  overlook  the  merit  of  the  Flavian  Ctesars, 
and  especially  of  Trajan,  in  the  eyes  of  the  senators,  as  re- 
vivers of  the  old  traditions  of  conquest.  The  xhe  noMes  fa_ 
Romans  as  a nation  had  gloried  in  victories  peers' who"1' 
and  triumphs;  but  the  nobles  had  lived  upon  ^th’conquests 
them.  The  wealth  and  consideration  of  the  old  aQd  Plunder- 

1 Hadrian  was  the  first  to  employ  Roman  knights  in  his  private  service  in 
the  place  of  freedmen.  Spartian,  Hadr.  22. ; and  this  innovation  was  grad- 
ually formed  into  a system,  and  remained  in  use  beyond  the  time  of  Constan* 


138 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


[A  D.  138 


historic  houses  had  depended  on  their  opportunities  of  com- 
mand, of  plunder,  of  administrative  office.  The  peace  of  the 
empire  had  reduced  the  nobles  in  this  respect  to  the  level  of 
private  citizens.  Hence  their  deep  disgust  at  the  imperial 
system.  They  were  never  tired,  never  ashamed  of  flouting 
the  weakness  and  cowardice  of  the  princes  who  refused  to 
launch  them  against  the  foreigner  on  the  frontier.  Vespa- 
sian earned  their  sympathy  by  his  warlike  career  before  he 
sheathed  his  sword;  and  his  closing  the  temple  of  Janus  be- 
tokened the  cessation  of  civil  rather  than  of  foreign  warfare. 
The  extension  of  the  empire  in  Britain  was  continued  through- 
out his  reign.  Domitian  added  a new  province  beyond  the 
Solway,  and  attempted  at  least  to  acquire  fresh  territories  on 
the  Danube.  The  acquisitions  of  Trajan  exalted  him  in  the 
eyes  of  his  senatorial  flatterers  to  the  rank  of  a Pompeius  or 
a Ctesar.  But  the  old  policy  of  the  republic,  the  policy  of 
the  senate  in  its  era  of  ascendancy,  then  revived  for  a season, 
could  not  be  perpetuated.  Hadrian  found  it  necessary,  like 
Augustus,  to  draw  in  his  outposts,  and  Hadrian  like  Augus- 
tus in  his  latter  years,  or  like  Tiberius  the  imitator  of  Augus- 
tus, became  an  object  of  pique  and  discontent  to  the  senators, 
and  suffered  in  character  from  their  unscrupulous  animosity. 
These  passions  were  at  last  calmed  down  in  the  languid 
trance  of  the  reign  of  Antoninus. 


The  emperor’s  freedmen  had  been  special  objects  of  jeal- 


ousy because  they  intercepted  the  influence  in  his  counsels 


The  council  or 
cabinet  of  the 
emperor;  the 
Consistorium 
and  Audito- 
rium. 


which  the  senate  claimed  for  its  own.  Augustus 
had  instituted  a council  or  cabinet  of  fifteen,  com- 
prising the  consuls  and  chief  functionaries,  with 
whom  he  prepared  his  measures,  and  to  whom  he 


partly  opened  the  secrets  of  his  policy.  Under  the  Claudii 
this  intimacy  had  been  doubtless  obstructed  by  the  personal 
interest  of  Sejanus  and  Macro,  of  Pallas  and  Narcissus.  But 
Domitian,  who  amidst  all  his  vices  retained  at  least  no  fa- 


tine.  Victor,  Epit.  14. : “ officia  sane  publica  et  palatina,  nec  non  militiae,  in 
sam  formam  statuit,  quae  paucis  a Constantino  immutatis  hodie  perseverant.” 


&.  U.  891.] 


TOLER  THE  EMPIRE. 


439 


vourite  and  kept  Lis  freedtnen  in  check,  the  council  recovered 
some  portion  of  its  authority : even  the  burlesque  debate  of 
the  turbot  shows  that  functions  which  could  be  so  caricatured 
were  not  wholly  in  abeyance.  The  council  or  Oonsistorium, 
as  it  came  to  be  designated,  continued  to  gain  in  dignity ; 
while  other  advisers,  taken  also  from  the  highest  nobility, 
formed,  under  the  name  of  the  Auditorium,  a bench  of  assess- 
ors in  the  emperor’s  court  of  justice.1  Bound  to  their  prince 
by  honours  and  dotations,  assured  by  his  solemn  promise 
that  he  would  allow  none  of  their  blood  to  be  shed  judicially, 
favoured  by  his  personal  intercourse,  distinguished  not  only 
by  their  garb  and  trappings,  but  by  the  sounding  title  of 
Glarissimi , flattered  with  the  declaration  made  by  Hadrian 
when  he  introduced  into  their  order  his  praetorian  prefect, 
that  he  could  bestow  on  his  choicest  friend  no  higher  dignity, 
the  senators  did  not  push  their  affectation  of  independence 
to  acts  of  defiance  or  rivalry.2  The  panegyric 
which  Pliny  pronounced  on  Trajan’s  early  prom-  gyrie onTra- 
ise  hazarded  the  boldest  utterances  of  which  J n' 
they  were  now  capable.  On  assuming  his  office  as  consul 

Marquardt  points  out  that  knights  and  others  below  the  rank  of  senators 
were  admitted  into  the  council,  at  least  in  the  time  of  Hadrian,  and  affirms, 
but  hardly  on  sufficient  grounds,  that  the  council  ceased  to  be  an  offshoot  of 
the  senate.  Comp.  Spartian,  Hadr.  22. : “ causas  ....  frequenter  audivit, 
adhibitis  consilio  consulibus  atque  praetoribus,  et  oplimis  senator  Unis."  c.  8. : 
“ optimos  quosque  de  senatu  in  contubernium  imperatorise  majestatis  adscivit 
....  erat  enim  tunc  mos  ut,  quum  princeps  causas  cognosceret,  et  senatores  et 
equites  Rom.  in  consilium  vocaret.”  But  of  these  last  it  is  said,  c.  18.:  “quos 
tamen  senatus  omnis  probasset  ” Passages  are  cited  from  Dion,  Ixxx.  1.  He- 
rodian,  vi.  1.  Lamprid.  Alex.  Sev.  15,  16.,  which  show  that  even  at  a latex 
period  the  composition  of  this  cabinet  was  essentially  senatorial. 

2 Spartian,  Hadr.  8.  The  members  of  the  Oonsistorium  received  salaries 
amounting  apparently  to  60,000  or  100,000  sesterces, =480?.  or  800?.  Orelli, 
Inscript.  2648,  cited  by  Marquardt  (Becker’s  Alterth.  iii.  2.  87,  note  10).  The 
term  “ Clarissimi,”  as  a specific  designation  of  the  senators,  may  have  come 
into  use  somewhat  later;  but  Pliny  ( Epist . ii.  11.;  vi.  29.  33.;  Paneg.  90.) 
qualifies  the  proceedings  of  the  illustrious  order  as  “ clarae,”  and  its  dignity  as 
2 claritas.” 


140 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


fA.  D.  138. 


Extent  to  suffect  in  September  100,  the  orator,  according 
dnigestofree-  to  customj  addressed  the  prince  in  a set  speech 
dom  of  speech,  before  the  fathers.  Such  harangues  had  been 
hitherto  confined  to  the  single  topic  of  thanks  for  the  honour 
to  which  the  speaker  had  been  raised.  But  Pliny  took  a 
higher  flight.  Trajan  had  but  recently  returned  from  the 
provinces.  His  life  had  been  past  mostly  in  the  camps ; he 
had  hardly  yet  confronted  the  august  assembly  since  his  elec- 
tion. The  object  of  the  speech  is  apparently  to  show  the 
entire  harmony  which  exists  between  the  conduct  of  the  new 
Caesar  and  the  vows  of  his  senate.1  Trajan  is  presumed  to 
enact  the  part  of  the  perfect  ruler.  He  fulfils  every  condition 
which  the  best  of  the  Romans  would  require  of  the  chief  to 
whom  they  pay  willing  obedience.  He  was  not  designated 
for  adoption  by  ISTerva  to  gratify  an  empress.  He  was  chosen 
from  among  the  citizens  as  the  best  and  worthiest.  He  who 
was  to  rule  over  all  should  be  selected  from  the  midst  of  all. 
Nor  though  a genuine  imperator,  was  Trajan  made  emperor 
by  the  army.  He  was  chosen  by  the  chosen  of  the  senate, 
and  with  the  consent  of  the  senate  itself.  The  orator  pro- 
ceeds to  set  forth  the  civil  merits  of  his  hero  ; his  moderation, 
in  not  multiplying  his  consulships  ; his  just  appreciation  of 
desert  in  bestowing  the  fasces  a third  time  on  the  most  dis- 
tinguished of  the  senators ; his  noble  indignation  against  the 
delators ; his  abolition  of  the  laws  of  Majesty ; his  indulgence 
to  the  people,  his  generosity  to  the  senate  and  nobles.  On 
the  first  day  of  his  consulship  Trajan  had  invited  the  fathers 
to  resume  their  liberty,  to  undertake  with  him  the  care  of  the 
empire,  to  watch  over  the  public  weal,  to  gird  themselves 
manfully  to  their  task.  Such  indeed  had  been  the  language 
of  other  princes  also ; but  none  had  ventured  to  take  them  at 
their  word.  It  was  not  so  now.  Thee , says  Pliny,  we  folr 
low , without  fear , without  hesitation.  Thou  commandest  us 


1 See  the  summary  of  the  Panegyricus  in  Gierig’s  edition,  Itispulatio,  p. 
xviii. ; or  in  the  work  itself,  cc.  1-5. ; 25-43. ; 44-46. ; 81-88,  &c.  It  had 
Dot  been  so  formerly : “ oderat  quos  nos  amaremus,  sed  et  nos  quos  ille.” 
Plin.  Paneg.  62. 


A.  U.  891.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


441 


to  be  free:  we  will  be  free.  Thou  requirest  us  to  express  our 
wishes  and  opinions : we  will  express  them } Intoxicated  by 
such  condescensions,  be  allows  the  senate  to  assume  a tone  of 
independence,  and  almost  of  condescension  also.  Though  the 
emperor  has  stood  before  the  consul  seated  to  take  the  oath 
of  allegiance  to  the  state ; though  perfect  civil  equality  has 
been  attained  between  prince  and  people ; though  the  magis- 
trates are  now  free  to  act  as  they  acted  when  no  emperor  ex 
isted  ; though  the  Gods  have  been  solemnly  invoked  to  pre- 
serve the  chief  of  the  state  as  long  as  he  is  faithful  to  his 
duties,  and  no  longer ; nevertheless  the  senate,  he  protests, 
will  continue  to  pay  honour  where  honour  is  due,  and  will 
not  risk  its  security  by  rudely  stretching  its  acknowledged 
authority.2  The  contrast  is  amusing  between  the  orator’s 
profession  of  independence  and  his  anxiety  not  to  offend  by 
it;  but  the  senate  supplied  the  best  commentary  on  its 
spokesman’s  language  by  its  zeal  in  protecting  the  person  of 
the  emperor,  and  anticipating  his  sentence  on  every  conspir- 
ator against  him. 

IV.  Nevertheless  the  love  of  raillery  and  complaining 
which  gained  on  the  Roman  character  as  it  lost  its  self-respect 
and  vigour,  might  annoy  even  the  most  popular 

& ’ & J , , . _ t 1 4.  The  prEetor- 

pnnces;  and  we  have  seen  that  both  Irajan  and  iansanathe 
Hadrian  resided  for  the  most  part  away  from  the  rm>  ’ 
city,  and  drew  their  breath  more  freely  at  a distance  from 
the  Curia.  The  rival  power  which  balanced  the  senate,  and 
divided  with  it  their  jealous  vigilance,  was  the  Army.  Be- 
tween these  forces  a certain  antagonism  had  always  existed. 

1 Plin.  Paneg.  66. 

2 Plin.  Paneg.  44,  64,  68,  93.  Comp.  Dubois-Guchan,  Taciie  et  son  Siecle, 
L IT.  The  consul,  speaking  solemnly  in  the  name  of  the  senate,  repudiates  the 
use  of  the  term  “ dominus,”  as  applied  to  the  emperor,  Paneg.  2,  and  insists 
on  the  proper  difference  between  “ dominatio  ” and  “ principatus,”  c.  45.  But 
in  his  official  letters  the  same  writer  does  not  hesitate  to  address  Trajan  as 
“ dominus.”  Epxst.  x.  2,  4,  5,  &c.  So  also  in  the  “ D.  Hadriani  Sententi®  et 
Epistolae,”  (Corp.  Juris.  Ante-jvslin.  p.  202.  ed.  Bcecking)  the  emperor  is 
constantly  addressed  by  petitioners  as  “ dominus  imperator.” 


442 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  138. 


The  pruetorian  When  Augustus  found  himself  at  the  head  of 
a'proiectfon 'to'1'  forty  legions,  it  was  difficult  to  reassure  the  coun- 
a^ainstTheie-  which  lay  helplessly  at  his  mercy.  The  es- 
8io"8-  tahlishment  of  a body-guard,  to  watch  over  the 

prince’s  safety,  and  keep  peace  at  the  same  time  in  the  city, 
was  a concession  to  these  natural  apprehensions.  The  legions 
were  disbanded,  or  dismissed  to  the  Rhine  and  Danube,  and 
the  praetorians,  a small  and  select  brigade,  humoured  by  high 
pay  and  many  indulgences,  took  their  place  under  the  walls 
of  Rome.  The  citizen  still  resumed  the  toga  when  he  entered 
the  gates,  and  the  armed  auxiliary  was  excluded  not  from 
the  city  only  but  from  the  whole  of  Italy.  In  the  second 
century  the  praetorian  cohorts  were  recruited  from  the  penin- 
sula, which  thenceforth  was  exempted  from  the  military  con- 
its  decline  and  scription.  The  senate  might  still  flatter  itself 
fal1-  that  this  formidable  body  was  unconnected  at 

least  with  the  regular  army ; that  it  was  no  foreign  force, 
like  the  legions  recruited  in  the  remotest  provinces,  menacing 
the  rights  of  the  citizens,  and  freedom  of  debate : but  a gen- 
uine militia,  chosen  from  the  citizens  themselves,  in  whose 
feelings  it  participated,  and  whose  privileges  it  protected 
sword  in  hand.  The  numbers,  favour  and  consideration  of 
the  praetorians  continued  to  advance,  till  the  emperors  re- 
sorted more  frequently  to  the  camps,  and  made  themselves 
more  eminently  the  chiefs  of  the  army.  From  that  time  the 
importance  of  the  city-guard  declined.  Trajan  paid  little 
regard  to  this  domestic  force,  and  gave  no  special  confidence 
to  its  prefects.  At  a later  period  Severus,  a champion  of  the 
legions,  both  affronted  and  chastised  it.  It  was  finally  abol- 
ished at  the  reconstruction  of  the  empire,  and  the  avowed 
establishment  of  military  government  by  Constantine. 

The  regular  army  continued  to  occupy  its  stations  gen- 
erally in  the  frontier  provinces,  where  it  was  retained  under 

the  direct  control  of  the  emperor.  With  him 

The  regular  . 

army  a merce-  rested  the  aopomtment  of  its  officers,  the  distnbu- 

nary  body.  . . . 

tion  of  its  several  corps,  and  the  regulation  of  its 
discipline.  The  transformation  of  the  legions  from  a national 


A.  U.  891.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


443 


militia  to  a paid  soldiery,  tliougli  long  consummated  in  fact, 
nad  hardly  yet  been  accepted  in  principle,  and  the  burdens 
which  might  be  imposed  on  every  citizen  on  the  ground  of 
natural  duty,  were  repudiated  by  mercenaries  who  bargained 
for  their  services.  Hence  the  soldiers  of  Tiberius  and  Trajan 
chafed  under  the  harsh  restraints  of  the  ancient  service,  and 
insisted  on  their  pay,  their  pensions,  their  privileges,  which 
they  regarded  as  alleviations  of  servitude.  Every-  Eelasation  of 
where  the  officers  connived  at  a relaxation  of  disciPllne- 
their  discipline,  and  the  emperors  had  no  harder  or  more  in- 
vidious task  than  to  brace  it  again,  when  they  had  become 
demoralized.  It  was  easier  to  soothe  their  mur-  Emolnments  o{ 
murs  by  largesses,  and  the  other  emoluments  of  servioe- 
the  service,  which  it  was  the  study  of  Nero  and  Domitian  to 
invent.1  The  soldier  was  withdrawn  from  the  ranks  of  cit- 
izenship, taught  to  regard  himself  as  a member  of  a separate 
commonwealth,  and  invested  with  all  the  outward  badges  of 
a distinct  and  favoured  class.  He  was  relieved  from  the  re- 
strictions which  retained  the  son  of  a Roman  family  under 
the  legal  power  of  his  father,  and  forbade  him  to  devise  prop- 
erty by  will.  The  soldier  was  specially  licensed  to  hold 
property  and  to  bequeath  it,  and  unmarried  and  childless  as 
he  was,  he  might  enjoy  the  satisfaction  of  being  caressed  by 
his  own  parent  for  the  sake  of  it.2  He  was  removed,  more- 
over, from  the  jurisdiction  of  the  civil  courts ; he  settled  dis- 
putes with  his  comrades  before  the  tribunal  of  his  own  offi- 

1 The  “prasmia  militias”  besides  ornaments  and  badges,  were  a pension  to 
veterans,  allotments  of  land,  immunity  from  certain  taxes,  citizenship  in  the 
case  of  auxiliaries.  We  possess  many  specimens  of  the  form  of  these  dis- 
charges, or  “ tabul®  honestre  missionis,”  thus,  for  instance : “ Ser.  Galba  impe' 
rator  ....  veteranis  qui  militaverunt  in  leg.  i.  Adjutr.  honestam  missionem 
et  civitatem  dedit.”  See  Marquardt  (Becker’s  Rcem.  Alterth.  iii.  2.  432.) 

* Comp.  Juv.  xvi.  61. : 

“ Solis  prasterea  testandi  militibus  jus  Vivo  patre  datur.” 

Comp  Inst.  ii.  12. : “ quod  quidem  jus  initio  tantum  militantibus  datum  est  tarn 
auctoritate  d.  Augusti,  quam  Nervae,  nec  non  optimi  imperatoris  Trajani;  pos- 
tea  vero  subscriptione  d.  Hadriani  etiam  dimissis  militia,  id  est  veteranis,  con 


cessum. 


444 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.D.  338 


cers,  and  even  the  civilian  whom  he  had  insulted  was  obliged 
to  appeal  against  him  to  the  partial  ears  of  the  legatus  or 
centurion.1  The  awe  in  which  these  privileges  caused  him 
to  be  held  by  the  quailing  provincials,  was  more  valuable 
perhaps  than  the  privileges  themselves.  He  found  that  if  he 
had  bartered  away  blood  and  strength,  his  elevation  in  social 
rank  had  more  than  repaid  him. 

It  was  fitting  that  the  legion,  the  instrument  by  which 
the  empire  had  been  acquired,  should  continue  to  exist  as  one 
Permanence  of  °f  its  most  permanent  and  unvaried  institutions, 
tionof  theie-  The  account  already  given  of  it  under  Augustus 
e'oa-  and  Nero  applies  in  almost  every  particular  to 

the  age  of  Antoninus.  Its  arms  and  accoutrements,  its  tac- 
tics and  training,  its  personal  composition,  remained  as  of 
old.  The  extension  of  the  provinces  required  some  addition 
to  the  number  of  legions,  which,  accordingly,  we  find  in- 
creased from  twenty-five  to  thirty ; but  the  complement  of 
each,  and  its  due  proportion  of  auxiliaries,  was  unchanged.3 


1 Juvenal,  1.  c. 

3 Marquardt  (Becker’s  Roim.  Alterih.  ili.  2.  356.)  gives  a list  of  the  legions 
from  a column  preserved  in  the  Vatican  Museum  of  the  date  of  M.  Aurelius. 
See  Gruter,  513.  3.;  Orelli,  3368,  corrected  by  Borghesi,  which  it  may  be  well 
to  subjoin. 

3 in  Britain : ii.  Augusta,  vi.  Victrix.  xx.  Valeria  Victrix. 

2 in  Germ.  sup. : viii.  Aug.  xxii.  Primigenia. 

2 in  Germ.  inf. : i.  Minervia.  xxx.  Ulpia. 

3 in  Pannon.  sup. : i.  Adjutrix.  x.  Gemina.  xiv.  Gemina. 

1 in  Pannon.  inf. : ii.  Adjutrix. 

2 in  Maesia  sup. : iv.  Flavia.  vii.  Claudia. 

4 in  Msesia  inf.  and  Dacia  : i.  Italica.  v.  Macedonica.  xi.  Claudia,  xiii 

Gemina. 

2 in  Cappadocia : xii.  Fulminata.  xv.  Apollinaris. 

1 in  Phcenice : iii.  Gallica. 


2 in  Syria : iv.  Scythica.  xvi.  Flavia. 
2 in  Judea : vi.  Ferrata.  x.  Fretensis. 


1 in  Arabia : iii.  Cyrenaica. 
1 in  Africa : iii.  Augusta. 

1 in  Egypt:  ii.  Trajana. 

1 in  Hispania : vii.  Gemina. 
1 in  Noricum:  ii.  Italica. 

1 in  Rh®tia : iii.  Italica. 


A.  U.  891.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


445 


The  rule  which  required  apparently  the  legatus,  or  brigadier, 
to  be  a senator,  while  the  tribune,  or  colonel,  was  sometimes 
taken  from  the  knights,  seems  to  indicate  a concession  to  the 
jealousy  of  the  imperial  councillors.  The  most  important 
innovation  we  discover  relates  to  the  system  of  castrameta- 
tion,  as  set  forth  by  Hyginus  in  the  time  of  Trajan.  A com- 
parison of  the  Polybian  and  the  Hyginian  camps  shows  that 
the  space  required  by  an  army  at  the  later  era  was  less  than 
half  of  that  which  was  allotted  at  the  earlier ; and  we  con- 
clude that  the  soldiers  of  the  empire  chose  rather  to  be 
crowded  into  a narrow  space  than  execute  the  laborious 
works  to  which  the  stricter  obedience  or  hardier  sinews  of 
the  republican  militia  submitted.1 

The  habit  of  constructing  not  fortified  camps  only,  as  of 
old,  but  long  lines  of  entrenchment  for  permanent  defence, 
of  which  we  have  met  with  such  striking  instan-  „ „ 

0 System  of  mill- 

ces,  has  commonly  been  branded  as  a symptom  tary  defence— 

' . * . *,  camps,  earth- 

of  declining  courage.  Yet  the  armies  of  the  re-  worts,  castei- 

° . ° -ti  i lated  forts,  and 

public  were  trained  to  wield  the  spade  alternately  barbarian  mer 

. , , , _ . cenaries. 

with  the  piium,  and  seem  never  to  have  despised 
the  shelter  of  the  mound  and  fosse.  W e may  remember  the 
earthworks  of  Caesar  on  the  banks  of  the  Rhone,  and  before 
the  Pompeian  camp  at  Petra ; and  the  fortified  lines  which 
traversed  the  heart  of  Germany  were  begun  by  Drusus  and 
Tiberius.  In  the  defensive  positions  which  the  Romans  now 
assumed  on  their  own  frontiers,  they  could  not  dispense  with 
the  protection  of  strong  places,  at  convenient  distances,  and 
their  connecting  these  posts  with  continuous  lines  was  surely 
no  proof  of  cowardice.  The  system,  indeed,  of  frontier  de- 
fences was  now  carried  out  more  elaborately.  The  marches 

1 See  the  two  systems  explained  by  General  Roy,  Mil.  Antiq.  in  Scotland,  p. 
186.  It  appears  that  the  space  required  for  19,000  men  under  the  Scipios  suf- 
ficed to  accommodate  50,000  under  Trajan.  The  general  characteristic  of  the 
Hyginian  camp  is  its  oblong  shape,  the  Polybian  being  properly  square.  But 
both  Hirtius  {Bell.  Alex.  80.)  and  Yegetius  (i.  23.),  at  an  interval  of  four  cen- 
turies, tell  us  that  Roman  camps  were  often  circular,  semicircular,  or  triangular, 
according  to  the  requirements  of  the  ground. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  138. 


146 

of  the  empire  assumed  the  character  of  a military  occupation. 
Their  garrisons  were  permanently  established ; every  camp 
was  converted  into  a castle,  enclosed  in  embattled  walls  of 
stone,  and  furnished  with  the  ordinary  conveniences  of  civil 
life.  The  surrounding  tracts  were  assigned  to  the  veterans, 
or  to  bands  of  warlike  barbarians  invited  from  beyond  the 
frontiers.  Certain  battalions  were  specially  exempted  from 
camp-duty,  and  lodged  as  a local  militia  in  the  neighbouring 
districts.  Bound  to  appear  in  arms  at  the  first  summons, 
they  enjoyed  the  use  of  cattle,  slaves  and  implements,  sup- 
plied them  by  the  state.1  The  hiring  of  barbarian  mercena- 
ries, which  became  daily  a more  important  element  in  the 
military  policy  of  the  empire,  had  not  been  unknown  to  the 
republic,  and  was  adopted  in  turn  by  every  imperator.2 3  But 
undoubtedly  the  system  was  carried  further  under  Trajan  and 
his  successors  than  before.  Not  bands  of  mercenary  war- 
riors only,  but  tribes  and  kingdoms  were  taken  into  pay. 
The  Marcomanni,  the  Astingi,  the  Jazyges  learnt  side  by 
side  with  the  Romans,  the  tactics  which  they  could  employ, 
when  occasion  served,  against  them.  The  cupidity  of  their 
chiefs  was  inflamed  by  the  touch  of  Roman  gold  ; and  thus, 
step  by  step,  was  introduced  the  unworthy  policy,  fatal  as  it 
finally  proved,  of  paying  a disguised  tribute  as  the  price  not 
only  of  active  defence,  but  even  of  abstinence  from  attack. 

In  their  love  of  gold,  the  barbarians  might  vie  with  their 

1 Tac.  Ann.  xiii.  54. : “ agros  vacuos  et  militum  usui  sepositos.”  The  vet- 

erans settled  on  these  frontier  lands  were  afterwards  called  “ limitanei  milites, 
ripenses,  riparienses.”  Codex  Theod.  vii,  22.  8.  ; Cod.  Justin,  xi.  59.  3. 

3 In  the  course  of  this  history  we  have  remarked  on  the  settlements  of 
Caesar  and  Agrippa  on  the  Rhine.  So  also  Tiberius,  Dion,  liv.  36. ; Suet.  Tib. 
9. ; Tac.  Ann.  ii.  63.  An  earlier  instance  of  the  kind  occurs  in  Livy,  xl.  34. 
38.  For  a later  instance,  see  Yopiscus  in  Prob.  14,  15.  M.  Antoninus,  after 
succeeding  to  Pius,  made  many  such  settlements  in  Dacia,  Pannonia,  Maesia, 
and  even  in  Italy.  But  he  desisted  from  introducing  the  barbarians  within  the 
Alps,  in  consequence  of  some  disturbances  at  Ravenna.  Dion,  lxxi.  11.  nai 
avTorv  ev  'Vafitwij  tivIq  oIkovvteq  kveurepiaav  ....  nai  did  tovt’  ovk'eti 
tt/v  ’I raklav  ovSeva  tuv  Papfiaocm  eorjyayev,  dX^a  nai  rovg  irpoaj>iyphov( 
t^moEV. 


A.  U.  891.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


447 


more  polished  patrons,  but  they  could  hardly  exceed  them. 
The  cupidity  of  the  legions  was  still,  as  in  the  The  emperors 
more  exciting  periods  of  civil  war,  the  principle  f^asto repress 
to  which  their  leaders  could  most  safely  appeal,  ofthe 
The  plunder  of  an  enemy  is  sweet  to  every  sol-  soldieIy- 
diery ; but  the  Roman  retained  to  the  last  the  national  taste 
for  compassing  and  hoarding  petty  lucre  by  thrift  and  usury, 
as  well  as  manual  labour.  The  solid  coin  he  received  for  his 
military  pay  was  invaluable  for  investment  at  a time  when 
even  the  wealthy  lived  chiefly  on  the  produce  of  their  farms ; 
and  if  the  means  of  investment  were  not  at  hand,  he  commit, - 
ted  it  as  a precious  deposit  to  the  soil,  often  not  to  be  brought 
to  light  again  before  the  lapse  of  many  centuries.  The  do- 
natives, given  in  sums  varying  from  ten  to  a hundred  pounds 
of  our  money,  required  at  every  accession,  and  every  anniver- 
sary of  an  accession,  might  be  regarded  as  a regular  advance 
on  the  soldier’s  ordinary  pay.  These  sums,  large  as  they 
were,  might  be  fairly  set  otf  against  the  expense  of  constant 
war  on  the  enemy,  or  the  scandal  of  plunder  and  free  quar- 
ters among  the  provincials.  Let  us  not  grudge  the  Caesars 
the  credit  of  maintaining  their  legionary  hordes  with  so  little 
injury  to  their  subjects,  and  on  the  whole  with  so  little  ag- 
gression on  their  neighbours.  When  compelled  to  wage  war 
beyond  the  frontiers,  they  were  nervously  solicitous  that 
their  wars  should  be  brief  as  well  as  triumphant.  To  gratify 
the  restlessness  of  the  soldiers  sometimes  might  be  necessary ; 
but  it  was  most  important  not  to  excite  the  ambition  of  the 
officers.  The  imperator,  and  he  alone,  though  long  absent 
from  the  camps,  must  be  regarded  as  the  chief  of  the  legions, 
the  source  of  honour,  the  patron  of  desert,  the  tutelary  genius 
whose  auspices  led  to  victory.  Hence  the  custom  of  requir- 
ing the  soldiers,  through  all  their  ranks,  to  take  the  military 
oath  at  the  commencement  of  every  year.  In  nothing  was 
*,he  contrast  more  marked  between  Trajan  and  Domitian, 
than  in  the  temper  with  which  each  awaited  the  announce- 
ment that  this  ceremony  had  been  completed.  To  the  one, 
says  Pliny,  the  day  was  happy  and  serene,  which  cast  over 


£48 


HISTORY  OR  THE  ROMANS 


[A.D.  138. 


the  other  a cloud  of  anxiety.  The  bad  princes  full  of  restless 
terror , and  underrating  even  the  patience  of  their  subjects , 
looked  out  on  all  sides  for  the  messengers  of  the  public  servi- 
tude. Did  rivers , snows  or  tempests , retard  the  tidings , 
straightway  they  apprehended  the  worst  that  they  deserved / 
they  feared  everybody  without  distinction  ; for  bad  princes 
see  their  own  successors  in  all  who  are  better  than  themselves , 
and  therefore  they  have  reason  to  fear  everybody.  But  Trar 
jan's  security  was  disturbed  neither  by  the  delay  of  his  mes- 
sengers, nor  by  their  tidings.  He  knows  that  the  oath  to  him 
is  everywhere  being  taken,  for  he  too  has  pledged  himself  by 
oath  to  all  the  citizens .* 

The  balance  thus  adjusted  between  the  senate,  the  praeto- 
rians, and  the  legions  was  precarious  and  temporary.  It  was 
The  emperors  i"  fact  a compromise  of  pretensions  and  forces 
which  required  for  its  security  wisdom  and  tem- 
per in  the  chief  of  the  state,  unreserved  surrender 
of  ambition  in  the  nobles,  and  the  continued  in- 
activity of  the  armies  on  the  frontier.  So  long 
indeed  as  the  prince  retained  his  place  in  the  city,  the  guards 
who  surrounded  his  person  had  the  power  to  make  or  un- 
make him  ; but  few  as  they  were  in  number,  and  subject  to 
his  constant  care  and  vigilance,  he  had,  generally,  ample 
means  of  attaching  or  controlling  them.  But  circumstances 
were  in  progress  which  compelled  him  at  no  distant  date  to 
quit  the  curia  and  the  praetorian  camp,  and  throw  himself 
into  the  lines  on  the  Rhine  and  Danube.  A preponderating 
influence  was  thus  given  to  the  army  both  in  the  choice  of 
the  ruler  and  the  mode  of  government.  The  champion  of  the 
soldiers  became  the  terror  of  the  senate,  which  he  seldom 
met  but  to  oppress  or  chastise  it.  His  own  perilous  eminence 
was  only  retained  by  pampering  the  multitude  of  his  mas- 
ters, either  by  constant  wars,  or  by  plunder  and  confiscation. 
Once  or  twice  the  senate,  maddened  by  wrongs  and  insults, 
ventured  to  oppose  to  a baseborn  Thracian  or  Illyrian,  in- 


become  the 
champions  of 
the  army,  and 
the  senate  is 
finally  over- 
powered by  the 
soldiers. 


1 Plin.  Paneg . G8. 


A.  U.  891.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


449 


vested  by  the  soldiers  with  the  imperial  purple,  a chief  of  its 
own  rank,  and  its  own  appointment ; but  strength  was  wanting 
to  its  pretensions,  and  the  elect  of  the  nobles  soon  fell  before  the 
favourite  of  the  army.  Had  the  empire  remained  unassailed 
from  without,  it  is  possible  that,  under  a succession  of  pru- 
dent princes,  the  compromise  of  the  Flavian  era  might  have 
been  maintained  indefinitely  ; but  its  wealth  was  too  tempt- 
ing, the  weakness  of  its  inanimate  bulk  too  apparent ; the  cu- 
pidity and  the  confidence  of  the  barbarians  waxed  together ; 
and  the  great  onset  they  made  on  it  in  the  latter  years  of 
Aurelius,  rendered  the  decline  of  the  constitutional  monarchy 
into  a pure  military  despotism  both  inevitable  and  rapid. 


150 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


'A. I).  161 


CHAPTER  LXVIII. 


U.  AURELIUS  ANTONINUS  SOLE  EMPEROR. — ASSOCIATION  OP  VERUS. DISTURB- 

ANCES ABROAD  AND  CALAMITIES  AT  HOME.— VERUS  CONDUCTS  A WAR  WITH 
PARTHIA. JOINT  TRIUMPH  OP  THE  EMPERORS,  166. — ADMINISTRATION  OP  AU- 
RELIUS AT  ROME. INROADS  OP  THE  GERMANS,  SCYTHIANS  AND  SARMATIANS 

ON  THE  NORTHERN  FRONTIER. PESTILENCE  SPREAD  THROUGH  THE  EMPIRE  BY 

THE  LEGIONS  RETURNING  FROM  SYRIA. THE  EMTERORS  ADVANCE  TO  AQUI- 

LELA,  167. THEY  CROSS  THE  ALPS,  168. RETURN  AND  DEATH  OF  YERUS, 

169. AURELIUS  ON  THE  DANUBE. HIS  VICTORY  OVER  THE  QUADI,  174. 

HIS  DOMESTIC  TROUBLES. — UNWORTHINESS  OF  HIS  SON  COMMODUS. — LICEN- 
TIOUSNESS OP  HIS  CONSORT  FAUSTINA. — REVOLT  AND  DEATH  OF  AVIDIUS  CAS- 
SIUS, 176. AURELIUS  IN  THE  EAST. HE  RETURNS  TO  ROME  AND  TRIUMPHS 

OVER  THE  SARMATIANS,  176. REPAIRS  AGAIN  TO  THE  DANUBE. HIS  SUC- 
CESSES OVER  THE  BARBARIANS,  AND  DEATH,  180. COMPARED  WITH  ALFRED 

THE  GREAT. 

SYMPTOMS  OF  DECLINE  OF  THE  EMPIRE. 1.  CONTRACTION  OF  THE  CIRCU- 

LATION.— 2.  DECREASE  IN  POPULATION. — 3.  EFFECTS  OF  VICE,  ARISING  FROM 

SLAVERY. 4.  EXHAUSTION  OF  ITALIAN  BLOOD,  IDEAS,  AND  PRINCIPLES. 

6.  EFFECT  OF  PESTILENCE  AND  NATURAL  DISTURBANCES. REVIVAL  OF  SUPER- 
STITIOUS OBSERVANCES  AND  PERSECUTION  OF  THE  CHRISTIANS. THE  “ MEDI- 

TATIONS ” OF  M.  AURELIUS. — STOICISM. NEW  PLATONISM. — REVIVAL  OF  POSI- 
TIVE BELIEF. CHRISTIANITY. CONCLUSION. (a.  D.  161-180:  A.  U.  914-933.) 

OF  all  the  Caesars  whose  names  are  enshrined  in  the  page 
of  history,  or  whose  features  are  preserved  to  us  in  the 
The  statue  of  repositories  of  art,  one  alone  seems  still  to  haunt 
thCcampido-,n  the  eternal  city  in  the  place  and  the  posture  most 
sIio-  familiar  to  him  in  life.  In  the  equestrian  statue 

of  Marcus  Aurelius,  which  crowns  the  platform  of  the  Cam- 
pidoglio,  imperial  Rome  lives  again.1  Of  all  her  consecrated 

1 This  noble  figure  of  bronze,  originally  gilded,  was  extracted  from  the  ruins 
of  the  Forum  in  1187,  and  placed  before  the  Lateran  palace  by  Clement  TIL 


A.E.  914.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


451 


sites  it  is  to  this  that  the  classical  pilgrim  should  most  de- 
voutly repair ; this  of  all  the  monuments  of  Roman  antiquity 
most  justly  challenges  his  veneration.  For  in  this  figure  we 
behold  an  emperor,  of  all  the  line  the  noblest  and  the  dear- 
est, such  as  he  actually  appeared ; we  realize  in  one  august 
exemplar  the  character  and  image  of  the  rulers  of  the  world. 
We  stand  here  face  to  face  with  a representative  of  the 
Scipios  and  Caesars,  with  a model  of  the  heroes  of  Tacitus 
and  Livy.  Our  other  Romans  are  effigies  of  the  closet  and 
the  museum ; this  alone  is  a man  of  the  streets,  the  forum, 
and  the  Capitol.  Such  special  prominence  is  well  reserved, 
amidst  the  wreck  of  ages,  for  him  whom  historians  combine 
to  honour  as  the  worthiest  of  the  Roman  people. 

The  habits  of  mind  which  Aurelius  had  cultivated  during 

the  period  of  his  probation,  were  little  fitted,  perhaps,  to 

give  him  a foresight  of  the  troubles  now  impend- 
. ° B _ . Aurelius  e:ener- 

ing.  In  presiding:  on  the  tribunals,  in  guiding;  ousiyasso- 

o i o 7 ~ ~ ciates  Verus 

the  deliberations  of  the  senate,  in  receiving  em-  with  himself  in 

. . the  empire. 

bassies  and  appointing  magistrates,  he  had 
shrunk  from  no  fatigue  or  responsibility ; but  the  distaste  he 
expressed  from  the  first  for  his  political  eminence,  continued 
no  doubt  to  the  end ; his  heart  was  still  with  his  chosen  stu- 
dies, and  with  the  sophists  and  rhetoricians  who  aided  him 
in  them.1  Hadrian  in  mere  gaiety  of  heart,  turned  the  prince 
into  an  academician,  but  it  was  with  genuine  reluctance,  and 
under  a strong  sense  of  duty,  that  Aurelius  converted  the 
academician  into  the  prince.  But  the  hope  that  his  peculiar 
training  might  render  him  a model  to  sovereigns,  the  recol- 

under  the  name  of  Constantine,  a misnomer  to  which  it  owes  perhaps  its  pres- 
ervation. In  1533  it  was  removed  to  the  Capitol,  where  it  now  stands.  Its 
base  is  supposed  to  have  been  recently  discovered  between  the  arch  of  Severus 
and  the  milliary  column.  It  may  have  nearly  replaced  the  equestrian  statue  of 
Domitian,  to  which  it  seems  to  have  borne  a resemblance  in  the  attitude  of  the 
rider.  See  above,  Chapter  lxii. 

1 Capitol.  M.  Anton.  Phil.  5. : “ ubi  se  comperit  ab  Hadriano  adoptaturn, 
magis  est  deterritus  quam  leetatus  ....  cumque  ab  eo  domestici  quasrerent, 
cur  tristis  in  adoptionem  regiam  transiret  ? disputavit,  qu®  mala  in  se  contine- 
jet  imperium.” 


152 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  161. 


lection  of  the  splendid  fallacy  of  Plato,  that  states  would 
sui'ely  flourish,  were  hut  their  philosophers  princes,  or  were 
but  their  princes  philosophers,  sustained  him  in  his  arduous 
and  unwelcome  task,  and  contributed  to  his  success  in  it.1 * 
Though  little  aware,  as  yet,  of  the  unparalleled  demands 
which  the  exigency  of  public  affairs  would  actually  make 
upon  his  energies,  he  showed  at  the  moment  of  his  accession 
that  he  had  completed  a conquest  over  himself.  Although, 
at  Hadrian’s  express  direction,  the  young  Verus  had  been 
adopted  together  with  him  by  Antoninus,  their  parent  had 
resolved,  from  the  first,  to  treat  them  on  an  unequal  footing. 
He  had  given  his  own  daughter  to  Aurelius ; he  had  associ- 
ated him  in  the  government,  and  bestowed  on  him  his  confi- 
dence as  his  destined  successor.  To  Verus  he  had  shown  no 
such  special  marks  of  favour.  He  had  scrutinized  the  child’s 
character,  in  which  no  training  availed  to  correct  disorders 
inherited  from  a weak  and  dissolute  sire ; and  even  when 
Verus  attained  to  manhood,  Antoninus  would  not  suffer  him 
to  participate  in  the  duties  of  sovereignty.  He  seems  to 
have  placed  the  youth  in  no  public  post  whatever ; but  sure- 
ly a man  so  good  and  just  would  not  thus  have  slighted  his 
ward,  had  he  not  been  convinced  that  his  faults  were  incor- 
rigible.3 Accordingly,  in  nominating  a successor,  he  seems 
to  have  passed  over  Verus  altogether.  But  Aurelius  had  no 
such  confidence  in  his  own  superiority.  He  suffered  his 
affection,  at  least,  to  persuade  him  that  he  could  guide  his 
brother’s  steps  and  cover  his  deficiencies.  When  the  sen- 
ate hailed  him  with  acclamations  as  the  natural  heir  and 
successor  to  their  deceased  favourite,  he  caused  all  his  own 
honours  and  offices  to  be  communicated  to  Verus,  giving  him 
the  title  of  Augustus  as  well  as  of  Ccesar ; so  that  now,  for 

1 Capitol.  M.  Anton.  Phil.  2 V.:  “ sententia  Platonis  semper  in  ore  fuit: 

florere  civitates,  si  aut  pliilosophi  imperarent,  aut  imperatores  philosopharentur.” 
Comp.  Plato,  De  Republ.  v.  18,  referred  to  by  Cicero,  ad  Qu.  fra.tr.  i.  1.  10. 
Victor  quotes  the  sentiment  as  that  of  the  elder  Antoninus. 

3 Capitol,  in  Ver.  imp.  3. : “ diu  autem  et  privatus  fuit,  et  ea  honorificentia 
caruit  qua  Marcus  omabatur.” 


A.U.  914.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


453 


the  first  time,  two  Augusti  sate  together  in  the  purple,  and 
the  legends  of  the  coinage  celebrated  their  mutual  concord 
or  joint  liberality.’  Aurelius  henceforth  contented  himself 
with  the  legitimate  prerogative  of  seniority  and  the  natural 
ascendancy  of  a nobler  and  stronger  character ; nor  did 
Verus,  whose  slight  and  perhaps  vicious  temper  was  not  de- 
void of  affection,  unduly  resent  the  superiority  thus  gently 
asserted.  The  elder  emperor  assumed,  indeed,  somewhat  of 
the  pai'ental  relation  towards  his  younger  colleague,  betroth- 
ed to  him  his  daughter  Lucilla,  and  directed  him  to  bear  the 
adoptive  names  of  Lucius  Aurelius  Antoninus  Y eras  Commo- 
dus.  After  transacting  the  requisite  ceremonies  in  the  sen- 
ate, both  princes  repaired  together  to  the  praetorian  camp, 
and  obtained  the  sanction  of  the  soldiers  to  their  installation, 
with  a promise  of  20,000  sesterces  to  each  of  the  guards,  and 
a proportionate  largess  to  the  legionaries. 

This  liberal  offer  was  no  doubt  promptly  redeemed.  The 
treasury  was  full,  and  at  the  critical  moment  of  the  transfer 
of  power  the  chief  with  money  in  hand  com- 

**  Disturbances 

manded  all  suffrages.1 2  Already  the  emperors  on  the  fron- 
were  troubled  with  the  report  of  an  insurrection 
of  Iberians  in  Lusitania,  and  of  an  irruption  of  Moors  in- 
to Spain.3  The  Chatti  broke  into  Gaul  and  Rhsetia,  count- 
ing, perhaps,  on  the  unsteady  attitude  of  the  provincial 
rulers ; and  in  Britain  we  are  assured  that  the  prefect  Statius 
Priscus  was  offered  the  purple  by  his  soldiers,  and  hardly 
suffered  to  decline  it.4  Aurelius,  with  prudence  and  moder- 

1 Capitol.  1.  c. : “ sibique  eonsortem  fecit,  cum  illi  soli  senatus  detulisset 
imperium.”  Eutrop.  viii.  5. : “ turn  primum  *Rom.  resp.  duobus  . . . paruit ; 
cum  usque  ad  eos  singulos  semper  habuisset  Augustos.” 

2 Eutrop.  viii.  8,  of  the  elder  Antoninus : “ serarium  opulentum  reliquit.” 

3 Capitol.  M.  Anton.  Phil.  8.  The  conduct  of  Priscus,  unnoticed  by  the 
earlier  historians,  is  recorded  from  some  other  sources  by  Constantine  Porphyr- 
ogenitus  : on  6’  iv  BpiTavvia  orparitoTag  Tlpionov  vttoot parr/yov  eiXovro  aiiro- 
Koaropa • 6 de  tt apTjTijaaTo.  Noel  des  Yergers,  Essai  sur  M.  Aurele , p.  29.  The 
successive  posts  held  by  Priscus  are  specified  in  an  inscription  found  at  Rome, 
which  may  have  been  engraved  on  the  base  of  a statue. 

* Capitol.  M.  Anion.  Phil.  21,  22. 


154 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  161 


ation,  contented  himself  with  recalling  his  rival,  and  gave 
him  another  command  in  Syria,  where  his  military  talents 
might  he  serviceably  employed.  Calpurnius  Agricola,  who 
was  sent  to  replace  him,  diverted  the  minds  of  the  legion, 
aries  by  a well-timed  attack  on  the  Caledonians ; hut  his  ob- 
ject was  perhaps  gained  when  he  had  led  forth  his  men  from 
their  camps,  and  the  total  absence  of  inscriptions  of  this  date 
on  the  line  of  the  Antonine  wall  seems  to  show  that  the  Ro- 
man arms  were  not  now  seriously  occupied  on  the  frontier  of 
the  British  province.1 

The  commander  of  the  forces  in  Syria  was  always  formid- 
able to  the  emperor  at  Rome,  especially  at  the  moment  of  a 
Veras  assumes  new  accession.  When  we  hear  that  on  the  death 
of\he?onx"din  °f  Antoninus  war  broke  out  on  the  eastern 
Byria-  frontier,  we  may  guess  that  the  new  rulers  hoped 

to  anticipate  revolt  by  an  aggressive  movement.  But  the 
mutual  jealousy  of  the  Romans  and  Parthians,  ever  on  the . 
watch  to  baffle  each  other  in  the  affairs  of  Armenia,  was 
ready  at  all  times  to  hurst  into  a flame ; and  the  last 
thoughts  of  Antoninus,  embittered  by  the  misconduct  of  his 
royal  clients,  may  have  been  clouded  with  apprehensions  of 
an  outbreak  in  this  quarter,  as  soon  as  his  own  firm  hand 
should  be  withdrawn.2  There  was  serious  prospect  of  war 
in  the  East.  It  was  deemed  prudent  for  one  at  least  of  the 
emperors  to  assume  command  there  in  person,  and  Aurelius 
deputed  to  his  colleague  the  care  of  this  enterprise,  in  which, 
with  chosen  generals  at  his  side,  he  might  gain  distinctions, 
while  his  frivolity  and  weakness  would  be  removed  at  least 
from  the  gaze  of  the  citizens.  hTor,  indeed,  was  the  charge 
Aurelius  retained  for  himself  at  home  lighter  or  less  import- 
ant. 


1 Stuart,  Caledonia  Romana  ; Noel  des  Mergers,  Essai  sur  M.  Aurcle,  p.  63. 
The  name  of  Calpurnius  Agricola  occurs  on  the  lower  wall.  Gruter,  Inscript. 
86,  V. ; Orell.  Inscript,  iii.  6861. 

2 Thus  Capitolinus  reports,  in  apparent  contradiction  to  other  statements, 
that  on  his  death-bed  Antoninus  “ nihil  aliud  quam  de  regibus  quibus  irasce 
batur  locutus  est.” 


A.  U.  914.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


455 


Though  the  eagles  had  retreated  from  the  Tigris  to  the 
Euphrates,  the  chiefs  who  had  seen  how  irresistible  was  their 
swoop,  and  how  terrible  their  fury,  had  not  Yen- 

* * 7 Eevsrses  of 

tured  to  follow  them  to  them  nests,  and  assail  Rome  in  the 

^ East. 

them  in  their  own  fastnesses.  But  the  Parthians 
seized  the  moment  of  a change  in  the  succession  for  a side 
blow.  Another  Yologesus,  who  had  had  no  personal  expe- 
rience of  the  Roman  valour,  revived  the  claims  of  his  nation 
over  Armenia.  The  legions  were  summoned  to  assert  the 
influence  of  the  empire : but  the  legions  were  enervated  by 
long  peace  and  luxury ; discipline  had  been  shattered ; and 
neither  the  soldiers  nor  their  officers  were  fit  to  contend 
against  a vigorous  foe  in  a difficult  country.1 2  The  Roman 
arms  met  with  a series  of  reverses.  Their  defeat  at  Elegia 
was  severe  enough  to  recall  the  disasters  of  Charrae  and  the 
Teutoburg.  Severianus,  prefect  of  Cappadocia,  deceived  by 
a pretended  prophet,  was  slain,  with  the  total  rout  of  a 
legion.3  Meanwhile,  Aurelius  had  accompanied  his  colleague 
into  Campania,  and  there  bade  him  speed  on  his  mission  to 
the  East;  but  Verus  had  loitered  on  the  way,  and  was  still 
wasting  his  time  in  Apulia,  while  the  authority  of  the  empire 
was  imperilled  on  the  frontiers.  Fortunately, 

1 _ . . , Succeeded  by 

Rome  still  possessed  m the  East  a captain  of  the  splendid  vie- 
ancient  stamp.  The  valour  of  Avidius  Cassius 
checked  the  advance  of  the  victors,  and  turned  the  tide  of  vic- 
tory. The  whole  force  of  the  empire  was  placed  at  once  in 
his  hands.  Verus  reached  the  province,  but  took  no  active 
part  in  the  campaigns  that  followed.  The  peace  which  he 
languidly  offered  was  disdainfully  refused.3  While,  how- 
ever, the  young  prince  amused  himself  at  Antioch  and  Daphne, 

1 Fronto,  JSpist.  (ii.  193.),  draws  a picture  of  the  degeneracy  of  the  Syrian 

army. 

2 Lucian,  in  Alexandro,  c.  27.  The  leader  of  the  Parthians  is  here  called 
Othryades,  a mistake  for  Osroes,  or  Chosroes.  Comp.  Lucian,  Quoinodo  Hist, 
sit  comcrib.  c.  21.  Dion,  lxxi.  2.,  describes  the  Parthians  as  the  assailants. 
The  Romans  were  defeated,  as  of  old,  by  the  use  of  the  bow. 

3 Fronto,  however,  turns  this  transaction  into  a subject  of  panegyric  (ii.  341.) : 


-IbQ 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A . D.  161. 


or  fretted  at  the  ribald  jokes  of  the  populace,  Cassius  led  his  le- 
gions once  more  to  the  Tigris,  took  the  capitals  of  the  Parthian 
monarchy,  sacked  Seleucia,  and  burnt  the  royal  palace  at  Ctesi- 
phon.1  The  conquests  of  Trajan  were  suddenly  recovered ; the 
glory  of  the  Roman  arms  was  vindicated  ; the  confidence  of  the 
soldiers  was  re-established.  Statius  Priscus,  who  succeeded  to 
the  command  in  Cappadocia,  reoccupied  Artaxata.  Furius 
Saturninus,  Claudius  Fronto,  Martius  Yerus,  Julius  Marcia- 
nus,  and  Pontius  JEliarms,  the  chiefs  of  the  victorious  army, 
shed  a halo  of  renown  over  the  last  splendid  successes  of  the 
empire.2 

Ror  did  these  gallant  warriors  want  for  pens  to  celebrate 
them  exploits.  The  excitement  caused  by  this  sudden  revi- 
Ttese  actions  val  °f  the  old  Roman  prowess  seems  to  have 
tb!e  histories  of  kindled  the  imagination  of  the  men  of  letters,  and 
the  time.  transformed  the  herd  of  grammarians,  anecdotists 
and  rhetoricians  into  military  historians.3  All,  however,  that 
we  know  of  their  compositions,  in  which  they  signalized  the 
renown  of  Yerus  and  Cassius,  is  unfortunately  confined  to 
the  sarcastic  criticism  of  a contemporary  satirist.  Lucian 
requires  us  to  believe  that  the  narratives  of  these  pretended 
Livys  and  Sallusts  were  mere  clumsy  romances,  and  that  the 
few  real  facts  they  recorded  were  overlaid  with  fictions,  or 

“ literas  ultro  dederat  bellum,  si  vellet,  conditionibus  poneret.  Dum  oblatam 
pacem  spernit  barbarus,  male  mulcatus  est.” 

1 Dion,  1.  c.  Capitol.  Avion.  Phil.  9.  Ver.  8.  Lucian  refers  to  the  se- 
verity of  this  contest,  and  the  great  battles  fought  at  Europus  and  Sura,  on  the 
Euphrates.  Cassius  entered  Babylon.  The  names  of  five  legions,  and  of  de 
tachments  from  various  others,  which  served  in  this  war,  may  be  recovered 
from  medals  and  inscriptions.  Noel  des  Yergers,  Essai,  p.  5T. 

2 These  names  may  be  traced  in  various  inscriptions,  and  also  in  Lucian’s 
satire.  The  Chinese  writers  make  mention  of  a pretended  Roman  embassy, 
referred  to  this  period,  from  a chief  designated  as  Antum  (Antoninus).  Noel 
des  Vergers,  p.  58. 

3 Lucian,  Quomodo  Hist,  sit  conscrib.  Of  this  swarm  of  historians  we  re- 
cover the  names  of  Calpurnianus  of  Pompeiopolis,  of  Callimorphus,  surgeon  to 
a legion,  of  Antiochianus,  of  Demetrius  of  Sagalessus,  and  of  Asinius  Quadra 
us.  Noel  des  Yergers  p.  62. 


A.  U.  914.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


457 


distorted  by  rhetorical  flourishes.  The  work  which  Fronto, 
the  preceptor  of  Verus  and  Aurelius,  consecrated  to  this  in- 
teresting subject,  has  escaped  the  reflections  of  Lucian  : pos- 
sibly it  was  not  composed  till  after  the  publication  of  the 
treatise  On  the  Art  of  Writing  History.  The  introduction 
alone  remains.  Its  merit  is  trifling,  and  may  cause  us  to 
wonder  at  the  excessive  reputation  enjoyed  in  his  own  day 
by  its  author ; nor  can  we  doubt  that  its  affected  verbiage 
was  devoted  to  covering  all  the  defects,  and  enhancing  all  the 
merits  of  the  imperial  hero.  Posterity  at  least  was  not  de- 
ceived by  it.  The  common  voice  of  later  writers  declared 
that  Yerus  proved  wholly  incompetent  to  direct  the  affairs 
over  which  he  nominally  presided,  Avhile  some  insinuated 
that,  intoxicated  by  his  lieutenants’  successes,  he  dreamt 
that  he  could  govern  the  empire  alone,  and  actually  intrigued 
to  overthrow  his  colleague  and  patron.1 

After  a struggle  of  five  years,  Y ologesus,  driven  from  his 
capital  and  overmatched  in  every  quarter,  was  compelled  to 
sue  for  peace.  The  cession  of  Mesopotamia  was 

x . Joint  triumph 

demanded  and  enforced.  Once  only  during  the  of  Aurelius  and 
progress  of  hostilities  had  Yerus  quitted  his  vo- 
luptuous retreat,  when  he  retraced  his  steps  as  far  as  Ephesus 
to  receive  his  affianced  bride,  and  prevent,  as  was  surmised, 
the  further  advance  of  his  father-in-law  within  his  dominions. 
On  the  conclusion  of  peace  in  166  he  hastened 

...  A.  D.  166. 

back  to  Rome,  where  Aurelius  received  him  with 
open  arms,  and  threw  a veil  over  his  want  of  personal  prow- 
ess by  conducting  a joint  triumph  with  him.2  The  two 
emperors  assumed  the  titles  of  Parthicus,  Armeniacus,  and 
Medicus,  though  Aurelius  refused,  at  first,  a share  in  honours 
for  which  he  had  not  personally  contended.3  Yerus,  ashamed 

1 Fronto,  Be  Prindp.  Hist.  (ii.  337.)  Yerus,  in  one  of  his  letters,  entreats 
Fronio  to  write  the  history  of  this  war,  offering  to  send  him  the  necessary  ma- 
terials. The  actual  account,  as  far  as  our  fragments  extend,  is  a curious  paral- 
.el  between  Trajan  and  Yerus,  in  which  the  palm  is  openly  given  to  the  latter. 

2 Capitol.  Arden,  Phil.  12. 

8 Of  these  and  several  triumphal  designations  Medicus  alone,  it  is  said, 
135 


458 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  lGff. 


perhaps  of  Ins  own  demerits,  pressed  these  honours  upon  him, 
and  at  last  overcame  his  reserve.  Which  of  the  two  heroes , 
asked  the  courtly  Fronto,  ought  we  most  to  admire  ? 

It  has  been  said  that  the  cares  of  empire  at  home,  with 
which  Aurelius  specially  charged  himself,  were  not  less  grave 
m Anreiins  at  than  those  on  the  frontier.  After  attending  his 
Romo.  colleague  into  Campania,  he  had  returned  to  ap- 

ply all  his  resources  to  the  relief  of  the  city,  which  was  su  f- 
His  deference  fering  from  inundations  and  scarcity.  Casting 
to  the  senate.  aside  his  books,  to  which  he  had  little  leisure 
again  to  apply  himself,  and  bidding  farewell  to  the  benches 
of  the  rhetoricians,  which  he  had  so  long  frequented,  he  took 
the  affairs  of  state  and  the  wisest  counsellors  of  the  sen- 
ate to  his  bosom.  He  increased  in  various  ways  the  employ- 
ments and  the  consideration  of  the  illustrious  order.  The 
appellate  jurisdiction  of  this  supreme  court  was  extended  by 
him,  particularly  in  cases  in  which  the  prince’s  own  interests 
were  concerned.  Hadrian  had  superseded  the  functions  of 
the  old  municipal  officers  of  Italy,  the  duumvirs,  sediles,  and 
dictators  of  Samnium  and  Etruria,  by  the  appointment  of 
four  juridici  of  consular  rank.1  But  this  institution  was  again 
revised  by  Aurelius,  who  offered  the  high  and  lucrative  dis- 
tinction to  a larger  class  by  extending  it  to  prsetors  also.’ 
Beneath  these  superior  officers  was  a larger  class  of  curators, 
who  discharged  judicial  functions  in  the  several  burghs  of 
Italy,  and  these  were  now  to  be  selected  from  the  whole  body 
of  the  senators.  Aurelius  was  constant  in  his  attendance  in  the 
curia,  even  when  he  had  no  measures  of  his  own  to  propose. 
When  he  had  a Relation  to  make  to  the  fathers  he  would 
come,  even  from  the  distance  of  a Campanian  villa,  in  person, 

never  occurs  in  medals  or  inscriptions,  to  avoid,  perhaps,  a possible  misinter- 
pretation. 

Spartian,  Hadrian.  19.  Capitol.  Anion.  Phil.  11. 

Thus  we  read  in  an  inscription  of  C.  Cornelius  Thrallus,  “ juridicus  per 
Flaminiam  et  Ombriam,”  who  is  praised  by  the  people  of  Ariminum  “ob  exi- 
miam  moderationem,  et  in  sterilitate  annonm  laboriosam  fidem.”  From  this 
mention  of  a scarcity  Noel  des  Vergers  ( Essai , 45.)  supposes  that  the  institu- 
tion may  be  referred  to  the  first  year  of  Aurelius,  a very  precarious  conclusion 


A.  U.  919.  J 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


459 


rather  than  introduce  it  by  the  mouth  of  his  qusestor.  Nor 
did  he  fail  to  attend  the  comitia  of  the  senate,  at  which  the 
prince’s  direct  appointments  were  still  formally  ratified,  and 
which,  it  seems,  were  tedious  solemnities,  often  protracted 
far  into  the  night.  Yet  he  would  never  quit  the  assembly 
before  the  consul  pronounced  the  venerable  formula : Con- 
script fathers  we  no  longer  detain  you.  The  respect  thus 
paid  it  was  acknowledged  by  the  gratitude  of  the  body,  and 
a full  meed  of  praise  accorded  him  by  his  historians.  It  was 
taken  as  a further  compliment  that  when  he  wished  to  grat- 
ify a friend  with  the  choicest  of  boons,  instead  of  giving  him 
slaves  or  ornaments,  he  conferred  on  him  the  rank  of  senator. 
None  of  the  virtuous  chiefs  of  Rome  showed  more  deference 
to  the  senate.1 

The  merits  of  this  excellent  emperor  consisted,  however, 
not  so  much  in  the  vigour  of  his  own  acts,  or  the  breadth  and 
iustness  of  his  views,  as  in  the  choice  of  2;ood 

^ ^ His  cxccllcht 

ministers  and  able  instruments.  Amidst  the  ex-  choice  of  min- 
haustion  and  lassitude  of  the  great  families  at  this 
era  of  luxurious  security,  it  was  not  in  their  ranks  that  he 
could  find  men  of  shrewdness  and  energy  to  repair  or  sustain 
the  machine  of  empire.  The  ministers  of  Aurelius  were 
chosen  from  the  teachers  of  his  own  favourite  philosophy ; 
they  were  accomplished  speakers,  and  at  the  same  time  men 
of  sense  and  practical  ability.  Such,  we  may  believe,  was 
Junius  Rusticus, — Our  friend  the  prefect, — as  he  is  addressed 
by  his  patron  in  a rescript  of  The  divine  brothers , who,  after 
being  twice  consul,  commanded  for  many  years  in  the  city, 
and  is  supposed  to  have  passed  sentence  from  his  tribunal  on 
Justin,  the  Christian  martyr.2  The  prefecture  of  the  city,  it 
seems,  was  now  only  given  to  persons  who  had  been  twice 
consul;  an  ample  guarantee,  in  the  eyes  of  the  senators 
against  the  rash  and  careless  favouritism  of  the  earlier  Cm- 


1 Capitol.  M.  Anton.  Phil.  10,  11. 

5 Themistius,  Or  at.  IS,  17.  Digest,  xlix.  1.  3.:  '‘ex  rescripto  divorum  fra- 
tram,”  L e.  Aurelius  and  Yerus.  M.  Aurel.  Comment,  i.  7.  Dion,  Ixxi.  35, 
Ibe  martyrdom  of  Justin  is  placed  between  165  and  168. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.D.166. 


H50 

sars.  Cornelius  Fronto,  another  rhetorician,  had  attained 
the  consulship  as  far  hack  as  the  reign  of  Hadrian,  hut  de- 
clined office  in  the  provinces.  He  continued  in  his  old  age 
to  attend  and  advise  his  imperial  pupil,  who  treated  him  with 
the  highest  consideration.1  The  names,  moreover,  of  Salvius 
Julianus,  the  Jurist,  of  Helvius  Pertinax,  himself  afterwards 
a vii'tuous  but  unfortunate  emperor,  of  Catilius  Severus,  Va- 
lerius Asiaticus,  Martius  Verus,  and  other  persons  of  high 
public  character,  are  recorded  in  the  list  of  prefects,  as  men 
on  whom  Aurelius  justly  bestowed  his  esteem  and  con- 
fidence.* 

During  the  last  years  of  the  Parthian  expedition,  the 
government  had  been  disquieted  by  despatches  from  both 
the  Upper  and  Lower  Danube,  announcing  re- 

Inroads  of  the  n . . , , . ’ , , ° , 

barbarians  peated  inroads  ot  the  barbarians  along  the  whole 

along  the  whole  . „ 

Danubian  &on-  course  ol  the  river.  Aurelius  felt  that  Home  was 
not  strong  enough,  at  least  at  the  moment,  to 
wage  two  great  wars  simultaneously.  He  had  directed  his 
officers  to  connive,  to  bribe,  to  temporize,  till  the  renewal  of 
peace  in  the  East  should  leave  a numerous  army  of  veterans 
free  for  other  service.  The  honours  with  which  the  emperors 
were  greeted,  the  triumph  they  celebrated,  the  victories  they 
proclaimed  on  the  return  of  V erus,  disguised  to  the  populace 
the  deep  anxiety  of  their  statesmen,  who  seem  to  have  been 
struck  now  suddenly,  and  for  the  first  time,  by  apprehensions 
of  decline  at  the  centre  of  the  empire,  and  of  increase  of 
power  in  its  assailants  on  the  frontiers.  Aurelius  was  evi- 
Apprehensiona  dently  much  depressed;  Verus  continued  careless 
Supinenessof  an‘l  insensible  as  ever.  The  younger  Caesar 
Verus.  flung  himself  into  the  dissipations  of  his  villa  on 

1 The  discovery  of  the  remains  of  Fionto,  consisting  of  a large  number  of 
letters  between  him  and  his  pupils  Aurelius  and  Yerus,  together  with  a sketch 
of  contemporary  history,  Principia  historia and  some  miscellaneous  fragments, 
has  lowered  rather  than  raised  the  reputation  of  the  man  who  in  his  own  day 
was  considered  a second  Cicero.  His  history  is  a vapid  panegyric,  his  letters 
idle  prattle.  He  was,  perhaps,  very  old  at  the  time  of  writing  them ; but  at 
best  they  cast  a fatal  shade  over  the  literary  character  of  the  age. 

3 Noel  des  Vergers,  Essai,  &c.,  p.  54.,  from  Borghesi’s  recent  investigations 
among  the  inscriptions. 


&.U.  919.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


401 


the  Olodian  Way,  and  among  his  boon  companions  paraded 
the  trophies  of  his  campaigns,  his  troops  of  buffoons  and 
players,  dancers  and  conjurors,  and  all  the  vilest  spawn  of 
the  Orontes.1 2 

But  these  obnoxious  instruments  of  dissipation  were  not 
the  most  fatal  gift  the  East  had  now  conferred  upon  her 
conquerors.  The  army  of  Syria,  which  accom-  pestiienco 
panied  Verus  into  Italy,  was  deeply  infected  Sghout  tho 
with  the  germs  of  a strange  and  deadly  pesti- 
lence,  contracted  in  the  marshes  or  sands  of  Meso-  from  the  East- 
potamia.  In  every  town  it  traversed  it  disseminated  the  in- 
fection.3 In  Rome,  the  number  of  victims  amounted  to  many 
thousands.  The  virulence  of  the  disease  was  no  doubt  in- 
creased by  the  long-continued  scarcity,  and  the  general  mis- 
ery of  the  people.  Superstitious  fears  demanded  a crime  and 
a victim.  The  crime  was  discovered  in  the  treachery  em- 
ployed, as  it  was  averred,  by  Avidius  Cassius,  in  the  sack  of 
Seleucia ; and  thence,  according  to  report,  the  seeds  of  plague 
were  scattered  far  and  wide  on  the  opening  of  a coffer  in  the 
temple  of  Apollo.3  Cassius,  indeed,  was  too  powerful  to  be 
sacrificed  to  a popular  outcry.  We  may  conjecture,  how- 
ever, that  the  fierce  hostility  to  the  Christians  which  now 
suddenly  blazed  forth  was  due  to  these  panic  alarms.  Not 
among  the  Christians  only,  but  through  the  ranks  of  Pagan 

1 Capitolinas  (Ver.  4.)  compares  the  vices  of  Yerus  to  the  mad  freaks  of 
Caius,  the  low  buffoonery  of  Nero,  and  the  tasteless  gluttony  of  Vitellius : 
“ amavit  et  aurigas,  prasino  favens.  Gladiatorum  etiam  frequentius  pugnas  in 
convivio  habuit.”  Aurelius  groaned  over  dissipation  which  he  deemed  extrav- 
agant and  vicious  : “ post  convivium  lusum  est  tesseris  usque  ad  lucem.” 

2 Capitol.  Ver.  8. : “ fuit  ejus  fati  ut  in  eas  provincias,  per  quas  rediit.,  Ro- 
mam  usque,  luem  secum  deferre  videretur.” 

3 Capitol.  1.  c. : “ nata  fertur  pestilentia  in  Babylonia,  ubi  de  templo  Apo!> 
linis  ex  arcula  aurea,  quam  miles  forte  inciderat,  spiritus  pestilens  evasit,  atqua 
inde  Parthos  orbemque  complesse.”  The  statement  is  repeated  by  Ammianus 
Marcellinus,  xxiii.  6.  24.,  with  the  variation  that  the  effluvium  proceeded  from 
a narrow  chink  or  crevice  in  the  temples.  The  fatal  effects  of  subterranean 
gases  were  often  the  subject  of  wondering  remark  to  the  ancients.  See  ApuL 
de  mundo,  p.  729.,  and  the  commentators  on  Amm.  Marcell,  in  loc. 


462 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  166. 


society  also,  prophecies  of  the  world’s  impending  conflagra- 
tion were  boldly  advanced,  and  eagerly  credited.  Misery  and 
terror,  terror  and  imposture,  went  as  usual  hand  in  hand.  Pre- 
tenders trifled  evith  the  popular  agony  for  gain  or  notoriety. 
One  man  asserted  that  the  secular  fire  would  descend  at  the 
moment  when,  casting  himself  from  a tree  in  the  Campus 
Martius,  he  should  be  seen  transformed  into  a stork.  He 
leapt  from  the  tree,  and  let  a stork  fly  from  his  bosom ; but 
the  trick  was  discovered,  and  forgiven,  with  a pensive  sigh, 
by  the  gentle  Aurelius.1  The  emperor’s  philosophical  tenets, 
however  inconsistent  with  a genuine  belief,  recommended  a 
reverential  observance  of  established  cults ; and  the  enthu- 
siasm of  so  tender  a spirit  was  itself  akin  to  superstition. 
He  was  fain  to  invoke  in  aid  of  the  commonwealth  all  the 
rites  and  formulas  of  pagan  religion.  He  summoned  to  Rome 
the  ministers  of  every  deity,  foreign  as  well  as  national,  per- 
formed a solemn  lustration  of  the  city,  and  delayed  his  de- 
parture for  the  war  till  he  had  celebrated  a lectisternium 
seven  days  successively.2  Meanwhile,  the  bodies  of  the  dead 
were  too  numerous  to  be  tended  with  the  usual  ceremonies. 
Carts  and  waggons  were  employed  to  convey  them  to  their 
place  of  sepulture.  Hot  the  vulgar  herd  of  the  Suburra  only, 
the  usual  victims  of  a pestilence,  were  stricken,  but  many  of 
the  highest  rank  also  suffered.  Aurelius  marked  the  national 
character  of  the  calamity  by  according  to  small  as  well  as 
great  the  melancholy  tribute  of  a public  burial.  The  plague 

1 Capitol.  M.  Anton.  Phil.  13. 

2 The  sacrifices  which  Aurelius  made  on  this  occasion  were  remembered 
two  centuries  later ; and  when  Julian  offered  similar  propitiations  to  the  na- 
tional divinities  before  engaging  in  his  Parthian  expedition,  he  was  reminded 
of  the  epigram  current  in  the  days  of  his  predecessor.  Cf.  Ammian.  Marc, 
xxv.  4. : 

ol  flies  ol  'XevKol  M apKu  rti  K aioapt  %aipuv  ■ 
av  6s  oi>  viKT/aqg  a/sfieg  an  cooped  a. 

But  the  same  venerable  jest  had  already  been  applied  to  Augustus.  Senec.  ck 
benefic.  ill.  27. : “ Rufus,  vir  ordinis  senatorii,  inter  coenam  optaverat,  ne  Caesar 
salvus  rediret  ex  peregrinatione  quam  parabat;  et  adjecerat,  idem  omnes  et 
tauros  et  vitulos  optare.” 


A.  U.  919.1 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


463 


diverged  in  every  direction  from  the  line  along  which  it  had 
been  carried.  It  spread  from  east  to  west,  to  the  right  and 
to  the  left,  with  such  virulence,  that  one  writer,  at  least,  has 
ventured  to  affirm  that  more  than  half  the  population,  and 
almost  all  the  soldiers,  perished.1  Orosius  may  he  credited 
in  his  fearful  account  of  this  visitation,  though,  with  the  nat- 
ural feeling  of  his  co-religionists,  he  ascribes  it  to  the  per- 
secution of  the  Christians,  which  he  says  had  already  broken 
out  in  Asia  and  Gaul.2  The  plague,  he  says,  extended 
through  many  provinces,  and  so  devastated  the  whole  of 
Italy,  that  villas,  towns,  and  lands  were  everywhere  left 
without  inhabitant  or  cultivator,  and  fell  to  ruin,  or  relapsed 
into  wildernesses.  It  is  affirmed,  too,  he  adds,  as  if  from  ac- 
credited records,  that  the  legions  in  their  winter  quarters 
were  so  reduced  that  it  was  impossible  to  wage  the  Marco- 
mannic  war  without  raising  a new  army,  which  detained 
Aurelius  three  years  at  Carnuntum.3 

It  was  in  167,  in  the  depth  of  this  sore  affliction,  that  the 
emperors  went  forth  together;  for  Aurelius  scrupled  either 
to  send  Verus  to  the  war  without  him,  or  to  campion  of 
leave  him  in  the  city.  The  legions  followed,  16T- 
drooping  with  sickness  and  despondency ; reports  from  the 
scene  of  warfare  were  terrific.  The  audacity  of  the  assail- 
ants, their  numbers  and  organization,  the  alarm  of  the  pro- 
vincials, the  falling  in  of  the  outposts,  and  defeat  of  frontier 
cohorts,  combined  to  show  that  the  crisis  was  of  no  common 
kind,  and  would  task  all  the  energies  of  the  state,  all  the  en- 

1 Eutrop.  viii.  12.:  “ut  Romse  ac  per  Italiam  provinciasque  maxima  homi 
num  pars,  militum  omnes  fere  copies  languore  defecerint.”  Amrnian.  Marcell. 
L c. : “ ab  ipsis  Persarum  finibus  adusque  Rherram  et  Gallias.” 

2 Oros.  vii.  15. : “ secuta  est  lues.”  Unfortunately,  we  cannot  determine 
the  year  of  the  martyrdom  of  Justin,  which  Tillemont  puts  in  168,  two  years 
after  the  breaking  out  of  the  pestilence.  Clinton,  however,  assigns  the  martyr 
dom  of  Polycarp  to  166.  Greswell,  Suppl.  Dissertations , p.  247,  foil,  to  164. 

3 Oros.  1.  c. : “ delectu  militum  quern  triennio  jugiter  apud  Carnuntum  M. 
Antoninus  habuit.” 


404 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  IGA 


ergies  of  its  rulers.1  But  Aurelius  was  as  yet 

The  emperors  . .... 

advance  to  untried  in  war : to  his  subjects  lie  was  known  at 
best  as  a laborious  administrator  of  domestic  af- 
fairs; while  Yerus  had  only  shown  himself  abroad  to  earn 
general  contempt.  The  citizens  were  not  reassured  by  their 
departure ; and  it  was  hardly  to  be  expected  that  the  bar- 
barians would  be  terrified  by  their  arrival.  But  the  name 
of  Imperator  still  commanded  the  respect  of  the  nations. 
When  the  emperors  reached  Aquileia,  they  heard  that  the 
MarcOmanni  had  already  recrossed  the  Danube,  and  the 
Quadi,  who  had  lately  lost  their  own  king,  offered  to  accept 
a ruler  from  the  Romans.  Yerus,  flushed  with  this  first  suc- 
cess, and  already  weary  of  a campaign  which  placed  him 
under  the  eye  of  an  austere  colleague,  proposed  at  once  to 
return ; but  Aurelius,  assuming  the  rights  of  an  elder  and 
superior,  forbade  him  to  leave  the  camp.2  The  retreat,  how- 
ever, of  the  barbarians,  allowed  both  the  brothers  to  retrace 
their  steps  before  the  winter,  and  in  the  absence  of  all  notes 
of  time  in  our  brief  and  meagre  histories,  the  legend  of  a 
medal,  and  the  casual  notice  of  a statute,  may  serve  to  show 
that  Aurelius  was  in  Rome  at  the  end  of  167,  and  the  begin- 
ning of  the  following  year. 

Meanwhile  every  effort  was  made  to  recruit  the  legions, 
to  reinforce  the  garrisons,  to  collect  arms  and  munitions  of 
Second  cam-  war.  With  the  return  of  the  military  season,  the 
paign.  emperors  exchanged  the  toga  for  the  sagum,  and 

once  more  revisited  their  camps.  But  their  levies  were  not 
yet  completed,  the  heart  of  the  empire  was  stricken  with 
languor,  and  its  limbs  shook  and  withered.  It  was  necessary 
to  enrol  the  slaves  for  service,  as  in  the  crisis  of  the  Punic 
invasion,  and  after  the  overthrow  of  Yerus.3  The  mustering 
of  the  forces  at  Aquileia  served  to  concentrate  the  fatal  sick- 

1 The  Quadi  and  Maroomanni,  it  seems,  had  penetrated  into  Italy,  had 
sacked  Opitergium,  and  even  laid  siege  to  Aquileia.  Ammian.  Marcell, 
xxix.  6. 

2 Capitol.  M.  Anton.  PhiL  14. 

* Capitol.  M.  Anton.  Phil.  21. 


A.  U.  920.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


465 


ness  which  had  abated  none  of  its  virulence,  and  with  which 
the  skill  of  Galen,  the  great  physician,  who  was  summoned 
to  head-quarters,  was  unable  to  contend.1  The 
emperors,  indeed,  now  crossed^  the  Julian  Alps,  cro^the^pl 
and  presented  themselves  in  Illyricum,  where 
they  provided  for  the  defence  of  Italy,  instead  of  striking  at 
the  advancing  power  of  the  enemy.  Again  Yerus  urged  his 
colleague  to  return.  Baffled  by  a foe  more  invincible  than 
the  barbarians,  they  again  suspended  their  operations,  and 
retraced  their  steps.  They  journeyed  amicably  in  the  same 
litter,  the  elder  still  striving  to  screen  the  weaknesses  of  the 
younger;  but  the  days  of  Yerus  were  already  numbered; 
shattered  by  fatigue  and  anxiety,  if  not  by  dis-  Eeturn  and 
sipation,  he  fell  sick  on  the  road,  and  expired  at  death  of  Veras. 
Altinum  in  YenetiaJ 

The  decease  of  an  unworthy  associate  was  a relief  to  the 
survivor.  Aurelius  could  bear  his  own  troubles  more  easily 
when  no  longer  inquired  to  urge  a reluctant  col-  1G9 

league,  whom  he  would  not  abandon  to  con-  A- u- 92i 
tempt.  He  desired  the  senate  to  decree  a consecration ; 
nevertheless,  he  did  not  fail  to  assure  it  that  the  victories 
over  the  Parthians  had  been  gained  by  his  own  politic  dis- 
positions, not  by  the  skill  or  courage  of  the  stripling  whom 
he  proposed  to  deify.  But  the  perils  of  the  state  now  im- 
pressed him  more  deeply  than  ever.  His  gentle  nature  was 
harrowed  by  the  misery  around  him,  inflicted  by  a Power 
with  which  it  seemed  even  impious  to  contend.  The  weight 
of  empire  was  too  heavy  a burden  for  the  sensitive  student ; 
yet  of  all  the  Romans,  none  bore  it  more  manfully.  He 

1 Galen  was  specially  charged  with  the  care  of  Commodus,  the  young  son 
of  Aurelius  (bom  a.  d.  161),  with  whom  he  soon  left  the  camp  for  Rome,  and 
there  occupied  himself  in  the  composition  of  his  voluminous  medical  treatises. 

2 Capitol.  1.  c.  Ver.  9.  M.  Anion.  Phil.  14. : “ Lucius  apoplexia  correp- 
tus  periit.”  This  writer  rejects,  with  honest  indignation,  the  fable  that  Aure- 
lius caused  his  brother  to  be  poisoned:  “nemo  est  principum  quern  non  gravis 
tama  perstringat.  . . . nota  est  fabula  quam  Marci  non  capit  vita  ....  sed 
hoc  nefas  est  de  Marco  putari  ....  totam  purgatam  confutatamque  respui. 
mus.” 


1C6 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  174, 


[dunged  into  the  struggle  with  the  barbarians  as  a refuge 
from  graver  apprehensions;  yet  when  he  could  steal  an  hour 
from  affairs  for  study  or  meditation,  he  still  patiently  re- 
viewed the  dogmas  of  philosophy,  or  examined  his  own  heart 
and  conscience  by  abstract  and  eternal  principles.  The  con- 
test with  the  assailants  was  long  and  dubious.  It  is  repre- 
sented as  a simultaneous,  and  even  a combined  attack,  of  all 
the  races  on  the  northern  frontier,  who  may  be  ranged  under 
the  three  national  divisions  of  Germans,  Scythians,  and  Sar- 
matians ; though  we  may  question  the  fact  of  an  actual 
league  among  tribes  so  many,  so  various,  and  so  distant.1 

Aurelius  seems  to  have  mustered  his  legions  at  Carnun- 
tum,  the  centre  of  the  menaced  line  of  defence,  but  his  hand 
„ . was  long  restrained  bv  the  weakness  of  his  forces. 

M.  Aurelius  on  . # J 

the  Danube.  Nor,  with  all  his  devotion  to  duty,  did  this  gal- 

a.  d.  m.  lant  prince  possess  the  vigour  or  the  genius  of  a 

great  eommander.2 3 * * *  He  cast  himself  on  the  ad- 
vice of  his  officers,  and  even  of  his  nobles,  and  was  wont  to 
pretend  that  it  better  became  him  to  follow  the  counsel  of 
many,  than  to  compel  all  to  submit  to  his  sole  direction.8 
This  indulgence  they  seem  to  have  repaid  by  complaining  of 
his  severity,  and  carping  at  his  studies ; but  the  war  with 
the  Marcomanni  cost  the  lives  of  many  of  their  number,  and 
the  Ulpian  F orum  was  crowded  with  statues  erected  in  their 

1 From  Dion,  lxxi.  12.,  and  Capitolinus,  M.  Anton.  Phil.  22.,  we  get  the 
names  of  the  Marcomanni,  Quadi,  Narisci,  and  Hermunduri  (German) ; the 
Latringi,  Buri,  Jazyges,  Astingi,  Cotini,  Dancrigi  (Sarmatian) ; the  Yictovales, 
Sosibes,  Sicobates,  Roxolani,  Bastarnse,  Peucini,  Alani,  and  Costoboci  (Scyth- 
ian). See  Greenwood,  Hist,  of  the  Germans , i.  176.,  who  remarks  on  the  im- 
probability of  these  nations  having  formed  a common  confederacy. 

2 Aurelius  speaks  disparagingly  of  his  own  natural  genius : this  may  be 
modesty,  but  it  agrees  with  the  idea  I form  of  him.  Comment,  v.  6. : Spipv 
rr)Ta  oov  ovx  exovtri  6av/ja<rcu.  scttu-  aX/ Id  erepa  TtohXa,  i<p’  av  ovk  &xEl£  djrar, 
o b yap  7 reipvica.  eiceiva  oiiv  vrapexov. 

3 Capitol.  M.  Anton.  Phil.  22.  Avidius  Cassius  complained  of  his  neglect- 

ing  the  empire  for  his  books : “ M.  Antoninus  philosophatur,  et  quserit  de  de- 

mentia, et  de  animis,  et  de  honesto  et  justo  ; nee  sentit  pro  republica.”  Vnl 

catius  Gallicanus,  in  Avid.  Cass.  14. 


A.  U.  927.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


4 67 


honour  by  their  master.1  Even  through  the  winter  were 
the  Romans  compelled  to  confront  a foe,  who  chose  the  sea- 
son of  frost  and  ice  for  his  inroads.  They  fought  more  than 
once  on  the  bosom  of  the  frozen  Danube,  when  they  could 
only  keep  their  footing  by  placing  their  shields  beneath 
them.2  At  other  times  the  campaign  was  carried  on  during 
the  greatest  heats  of  summer.  The  Quadi  surrounded  and 
reduced  them  to  straits  by  cutting  off  their  supply  of  water. 
A sudden  storm,  which  filled  the  Roman  camp  with  a season- 
able rainfall,  while  the  enemy  was  disordered  by 

1 J J Remarkable 

violent  lightnings,  was  regarded  as  miraculous,  victory  over 

, ° n T ’ . ° . „ _ . ’ the  Quad!. 

and  ascribed  to  the  incantations  of  an  Egyptian 
magician,  to  the  prayers  of  a legion  of  Christians, 
or  to  the  favour  of  Jove  towards  the  best  of  mortals,  accord- 
ing to  the  various  prejudices  of  different  observers.3  The 
question  itself  would  hardly  be  worth  an  allusion,  but  for  the 
pertinacity  with  which  it  was  once  debated,  and  the  import- 

1 Capitol.  1.  c.  The  barbarians  seem  to  have  penetrated  into  the  provinces 
in  various  quarters.  Pertinax,  afterwards  emperor,  succeeded  in  driving  them 
out  of  Rhsetia  and  Noricum.  Capitol.  Periin.  2.  Dion,  lxxi.  3.  The  presence 
of  a great  number  of  legions  along  the  Danubian  frontier  is  attested  by  in- 
scriptions. Noel  des  Vergers,  Essai,  see  p.  77,  foil. 

2 Dion,  lxvi.  7. 

3 See  the  account  of  the  event  as  given  by  Dion,  with  the  criticism  of  the 
Christian  Xiphilinus ; and  compare  the  famous  lines  of  Claudian : “ Chaldasa 
vago  seu  carmina  ritu  Armavere  Deos,  sea,  quod  reor,  ornne  Tonantis  Obse- 
quium  Marci  mores  potuere  mereri.”  xxviii.  349.  Capitol.  M.  Anion.  Phil.. 
24. : “ fulmen  de  coelo  precibus  suis  contra  hostium  machinamentum  extorsit, 
suis  pluvia  impetrata.”  Tertullian,  from  whom  the  church-writers  seem  to  have 
taken  the  idea  of  a Christian  miracle,  declares  that  letters  of  Aurelius  to  that 
effect  were  in  existence.  Apolog.  5.  (cf.  ad  Scap.  4.).  Eusebius,  Hist.  Ecd.  v.  5., 
says  merely  h6yog  kxu-  Orosius,  vii.  15. : “ exstare  dicuntur.”  Eusebius  re- 
fers to  a certain  Apollinaris  for  the  statement  that  the  emperor  gave  to  the  le- 
gion the  name  of  “ Fulminata,”  in  attestation  of  the  Christian  miracle ; but  it 
is  enough  to  say  that  there  was  a legion  already  so  called  under  Trajan.  Of 
recent  writers  Mr.  Fynes  Clinton  has  given  a full  collection  of  the  authorities. 
Appendix  to  Fast.  Rom.  p.  24.)  Professor  Blunt,  of  Cambridge,  the  latest 
defender  of  Patristic  miracles,  has  abandoned  this  one,  which  will  hardly  be 
maintained,  after  his  rejection,  by  any  English  Protestant  divine.  See  Lectures 
m the  Hist,  of  the  Church , p.  295. 


168 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  175. 


ance  even  recently  assigned  to  it.  But,  however  insignificant 
the  discussion  may  now  appear,  an  interest  will  still  attach 
to  the  event,  as  long  as  the  sculptures  on  the  column  of 
Aurelius,  which  still  adorns  the  principal  avenue  of  modern 
Rome,  present  to  us  the  figure  of  the  Olympian  Jupiter  cast- 
ing from  the  open  heavens  his  beneficent  rain-flood,  and  his 
appalling  thunderbolts. 

But  the  victory  thus  signally  gained  was  chequered  by 
many  reverses.  The  arms  of  Rome,  however  successful  in 
Troubles  of  An-  the  field,  were  impeded  by  the  climate  and  the 
tic'as' weii’as'  soil,  by  the  wide  spaces  to  be  traversed,  and  the 
public.  ubiquity  of  the  enemy.  Aurelius  was  retained 

in  the  north  through  several  summers  ; the  treaties  he  made 
with  his  adversaries  were  repeatedly  broken  by  them  again, 
and  the  peace  which  was  to  secure  him  a triumph  slipped 
constantly  from  his  hand.  To  the  public  troubles  which 
encompassed  him  were  added  domestic  calamities.  Of  the 
two  sons,  in  whom  he  might  hope  to  find  a comfort  and  sup- 
port in  his  old  age,  a blessing  to  which  none  of  his  prede- 

Premature  cessors  could  look  since  Vespasian,  Annins,  the 

deaths  of  his  . . L ’ . 

children.  elder,  fell  sick  in  early  youth,  and  died  after  a 

long  decline ; Commodus,  the  younger,  though  placed  under 
the  charge  of  the  sage  and  gentle  Fronto,  displayed,  from  the 
Evil  nature  of  first,  an  evil  nature.  A daughter  named  Faus- 
Commodus.  tina  filed  also  in  opening  girlhood.  The  father’s 
tenderness  for  his  children  is  attested  in  a letter  to  F ronto, 
which  agreeably  delineates  his  amiable  character.1  His  re- 
gard for  their  mother  was  tender  even  to  weakness,  if  at  least 
she  was  as  unworthy  of  a husband’s  confidence  as  some  his- 
torians have  represented  her ; yet  even  from  his  most  inti- 
mate friend  he  disguised  his  vexation  at  the  proofs  he  re- 
infidciityof  ceived  of  her  infidelity.  Her  guilt,  indeed,  he  is 
Faustina.  said  liave  acknowledged  and  deplored  ; but  he 
refused  to  dismiss  her,  pleading,  as  was  reported  in  excuse,  that 
if  he  divorced  his  wife  he  ought  also  to  surrender  the  empire 


1 Fronton.  Epist.  (i.  p.  258,  259.) 


A.  U.  928.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


469 


her  dowry.1  Even  at  the  commencement  of  their  union, 
while  Aurelius  was  occupied  with  affairs  at  Rome,  or  plunged 
in  his  studies  in  the  recesses  of  the  palace,  Faustina,  in  the 
voluptuous  villas  of  Campania,  rejected  the  restraints  of 
matronhood  with  flagrant  indecency.2  Such  is  the  account 
which  has  received  general  credence ; but  allowance  must  be 
made  for  the  ribaldry  of  contemporary  anecdote,  and  for  the 
hatred  of  the  next  generation  towards  the  mother  of  the  ty- 
rant Commodus.  The  insinuation  that  this  son  was  the  base- 
born  child  of  a gladiator,  suggested,  perhaps,  by  his  passion 
for  the  shows  of  the  arena,  is  belied  by  Fronto’s  warm  asser- 
tion of  his  likeness  to  Aurelius,  and  by  the  testimony  of  ex- 
isting coins  which  strikingly  confirms  it. 

1ST  or  can  we  affirm  with  confidence  another  charge  against 
Faustina,  of  still  graver  public  importance.  The  health  of 
Aurelius  caused  her  much  anxiety ; for  Commo- 

. J ’ Treason  of 

dus  was  frivolous  and  inexperienced,  and  among  Avidius  Cas- 

. , . . . { ’ . BillS. 

the  military  cruets  now  rising  to  eminence,  she 
saw  perhaps  more  than  one  who  might  snatch  at  the  purple 
on  his  decease.  Aurelius  was  not  perhaps  originally  sickly ; 
in  his  youth  he  had  enjoyed  all  martial  and  athletic  exer- 
cises ; but  his  devotion  to  study,  according  to  Dion,  had  early 
weakened  his  health,  and  the  fatigue  and  cares  of  his  pain- 
ful position  may  have  aggravated  every  morbid  symptom. 
Faustina  had  accompanied  her  husband  during  his  campaigns. 
After  the  rout  of  the  Quadi,  when  the  Army  saluted  him 
as  Imperator,  they  proclaimed  her  Mother  of  the  Camps .3 
She  was  on  the  spot,  and  from  personal  observations  she  was 
convinced  that  he  had  not  long  to  live.  She  addressed  her- 
self, so  it  was  asserted,  to  Avidins  Cassius,  assured  him  that 
the  throne  would  presently  be  vacant,  and  incited  him  to  as- 

1 Capitol.  M.  Anton.  Phil.  19.:  “ dixisse  fertur,  si  uxorem  dimittimus,  red- 
damus  et  dotem.”  Comp.  3.  29.  It  should  be  observed  that  no  such  charges 
are  brought  against  Faustina  by  Dion. 

2 Fronton.  Epist.  (ii.  p.  52,  54.) : “ tarn  simili  facie  ut  nihil  sit  hoc  simili 
Eimilius.” 

8 Capitol.  M.  Anton.  Phil.  26.  Dion,  lxxi.  10. 


470 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  175 


sume  tlie  purple  at  the  head  of  his  legions,  with  the  promise 
of  her  support,  and  the  oifer  of  her  hand.1 2  She  hoped  thus 
to  preserve  her  own  position,  and  secure  a throne,  at  least  in 
reversion,  for  her  son.  Cassius,  a descendant  of  the  tyranni- 
cide, professed  hereditary  hatred  to  tyrants,  and  was  wont 
to  lament  that  the  republic  could  not  be  rid  of  one  Imperator 
but  by  the  hand  of  another.3  Even  in  his  youth  he  had  har- 
boured the  idea  of  overthrowing  the  elder  Antoninus,  but 
his  impetuosity  had  been  checked  and  disguised  by  a prudent 
and  loyal  father.  Verus  had  conceived  just  fears  of  his  am- 
bition, and  had  warned  Aurelius  against  him.  Aurelius  had 
replied,  in  the  tone  of  stoical  fatalism,  that  no  prince  ever 
hilled  his  successor , and  had  added,  repeating  the  sentiment 
of  Hadrian,  How  wretched  is  the  lot  of  rulers,  whose  fears  of 
treason  are  never  credited  till  they  have  fallen  by  it ! * He 
refused  to  adopt  any  precautions,  and  was  content  to  leave 
the  Syrian  prefecture  in  the  hands  of  one  whom  he  knew 
to  be  brave  and  able,  and  a bulwark  of  the  ancient  disci- 
pline ; one  who,  in  a luxurious  age  and  a voluptuous  capital, 
alfected  the  character  of  a Marius,  and  put  to  death  without 
mercy  the  officer  wTho,  without  orders  to  fight,  had  gained 
him  a victory  ; who  finally  had  quelled  a mutiny  by  throw- 
ing himself  unarmed  into  the  ranks,  and  inviting  the  soldiers 

1 Dion,  Ixxi.  22.  Capitol.  M.  Anion.  Phil.  24. : “ ut  quidam  volunt.”  Vul- 
catius  Gallicanus,  Avid.  Cass.  7. : “ ut  quidam  dicunt.”  It  is  admitted  that, 
according  to  another  rumour,  this  story  was  a pretence  of  Cassius,  to  persuade 
his  soldiers  that  he  had  certain  information  of  the  emperor’s  death.  Gallicanus 
tells  us  that  he  takes  the  account  from  the  history  of  Marius  Maximus,  but  ex- 
pressly says  that  he  does  not  believe  in  the  alleged  guilt  of  Faustina.  The  rea- 
son, indeed,  which  he  gives,  that  her  letters  exist,  in  which  she  urged  her  hus- 
band to  punish  the  rebellion  with  severity,  is  not  very  conclusive.  See  cc.  9, 
10,  11. 

2 Avidius  Cassius  claimed  descent  from  C.  Cassius,  who  had  held  the  Syrian 
prefecture.  His  father  was  a Greek,  a rhetorician  of  Cyrrhus,  named  Heliodo- 
rus,  who  had  become  prefect  of  Egypt. 

3 Gallicanus,  Avid.  Cass.  2. : “ quod  avus  tuus  Hadrianus  dixerit ; 

ejus  autem  exemplum  ponere,  quam  Domitiani,  qui  hoc  primus  dixisse  fertur, 
malui.” 


A.  U.  928.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


471 


to  slay  him  if  they  dared.1  Such  was  the  man  who  sudden- 
ly announced  at  Antioch  that  Aurelius  was  dead,  assumed 
the  title  of  emperor,  and  having  received  the  ensigns  of  sov- 
ereignty from  a trusty  adherent,  whom  he  named  his  praeto- 
rian prefect,  invited  the  legions  to  sanction  his  usurpation. 
But  violent  and  headstrong  as  he  was,  he  had  failed  in  his 
calculations.  The  legions  detested  him ; they  rose  at  once 
against  him  and  slew  him  on  the  spot,  without  await- 
ing the  order  of  the  emperor.  The  report,  meanwhile,  of  his 
defection  reached  Rome,  and  the  senate  boldly  proclaimed 
him  a public  enemy  ; but  its  courage  rapidly  evaporated  on 
the  rumour  that  he  was  in  full  march  for  Italy,  prepared,  in 
the  emperor’s  absence,  to  take  dire  vengeance  for  the  insult, 
and  give  up  the  city  to  plunder.  The  head  of  the  traitor 
was  conveyed  to  Aurelius,  who  beheld  it  with  pity  and  con- 
cern.2 What  would  he  have  done  to  you  had  he  conquered? 
exclaimed  the  bystanders.  The  sage  calmly  appealed  to  his 
own  piety  and  virtue,  and  showed  that  all  the  princes  who 
had  perished  violently  before  him,  had  fallen  by  their  own 
deserts.3  He  entreated  the  senate,  to  whom  he  left  the  pun- 
ishment of  this  public  crime,  to  deal  mercifully  with  the 
guilty,  requesting  that  no  member  at  least  of  their  order 
should  suffer  under  his  rule.  The  family  of  the  traitor  he 
caused  to  be  spared,  and  even  generously  provided  for  them, 
and  a few  centurions  only  were  sacrificed  to  the  exigencies 
of  military  discipline.4  The . senate,  among  whom  Cassius 

1 Gallic,  c.  4. : “ meruit  timeri  quia  non  timuit,”  an  allusion  to  Lucan,  v. 
817.  Capitol.  Anion.  Phil.  21.:  “cum  per  Egyptum  Bucolici  milites  gravia 
multa  fecissent,  per  Avidium  Cassium  retusi  sunt.” 

2 Capitol.  M.  Anton.  Phil.  26. : “ doluit  denique  Cassium  exstinctum,  dicens, 
voluisse  se  sine  senatorio  sanguine  imperium  transigere.” 

3 Gallic.  Avid.  Cass.  8. : “ non  sic  Deos  coluimus,  nec  sic  vivimus,  ut  illo 
Dos  vinceret.  . . . meruisse  Neronem,  meruisse  Caligulam ; Othonem  et  Yitel- 
Eum  nec  imperare  voluisse.”  Galba’s  avarice  he  regarded  as  a public  crime. 
The  old  story  of  burning  the  papers  of  the  criminal,  that  his  accomplices  might 
not  be  known,  is  repeated  of  M.  Aurelius  by  Armnianus  Marcellinus,  xxi.  16, 

* The  letters  between  Aurelius,  Faustina,  and  the  senate  on  this  subject, 
are  very  interesting,  and  seem  to  be  genuine.  The  children  of  Avidius  Cassius 


172 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


| A.  D.  175. 


may  have  had  some  half  concealed  accomplices,  was  delight- 
ed at  a clemency  by  which  it  personally  benefited,  and  pour- 
ed forth  its  praise  and  gratitude  in  broken  exclamations : — 
O pious  Antonine  ; the  gods  preserve  thee  ! 0 Clement  An- 

tonine , the  gods  preserve  thee! — thou  miglitest  and  wouldest 
not ! — we  have  done  what  we  shoidd  do  ! — may  Commodus 
have  his  legitimate  sovereignty  / — confirm  thou  thy  own  off- 
spring ; make  our  children  safe  and  happy  ! — violence  can- 
not harm  good  government ! — the  tribunitian  power  for 
Commodus  I — thy  presence  and  protection  for  Commodus  ! 
— hail  to  thy  philosophy , to  thy  patience , to  thy  learning , to 
thy  nobility,  to  thy  innocence! — thou  conquerest  thy  foes ; 
thou  overcornest  thy  adversaries ! The  gods  protect  thee! 
and  so  on,  all  speaking  together.1 

The  news  of  the  defection  of  Cassius  had  reached  Aure- 
lius on  the  Danube.  He  summoned  his  son,  now  in  his  fif- 
teenth year,  to  his  side,  invested  him  with  the 
jxiirs  to  the  robe  o i manhood,  styled  him  Prince  of  the 
Youth,  and  designated  him  for  the  consulship. 
Having  thus  defied  the  assault  upon  his  dynasty,  he  went  for- 
ward to  crush  it.  Before  he  reached  Syria  the  enemy  had 
fallen ; hut  Aurelius  was  occupied  for  some  months  in  making 

dispositions  for  the  future.  During  his  progress 
Death  of  Fans-  1 . ° 1 ° 

tina.  __  he  lost  Faustina,  who  died  suddenly  at  Halala, 
at  the  foot  of  the  Taurus.  Faithful  to  the  last 
to  the  unfaithful,  he  desired  the  senate  to  decree  her  divine 
honours ; he  gave  her  name  to  the  place  of  her  decease,  and 
built  her  there  a temple  ; he  established,  moreover,  a new 
foundation  of  Faustinian  orphan  girls.2  Aurelius  had  never 

were  allowed  to  retain  a portion  of  their  patrimony,  and  were  admitted  to  pub- 
lic office.  Commodus,  however,  on  his  accession,  caused  them  “ all  to  ba 
burnt  alive.”  Gallic.  Avid.  Cass.  13.  In  consequence  of  this  attempted  revolt 
in  Syria,  Aurelius  ordained  that  in  future  no  officer  should  hold  the  prefecture 
of  the  province  in  which  he  had  been  bom.  Dion,  Ixxi.  31. 

1 Gallic.  Avid.  Cass.  13.  The  date  of  the  insurrection  of  Avidius  Cassius 
is  fixed  by  Clinton  to  the  year  175. 

“ Capitol.  If.  Anion.  Phil.  26.  Dion,  lxxi.  29.  Some  said  that  she  hilled 


A.U.  923.] 


UNDEIl  THE  EMPIRE. 


473 


before  visited  tire  East.  He  examined  with,  great  interest 
the  most  renowned  seats  of  ancient  wisdom,  and  favoured 
them  with  tokens  of  his  munificence.1  Repairing  from  An- 
tioch to  Alexandria,  where  Cassius  had  gained  support,  he 
uot  only  pardoned  all  offences,  but  condescended  to  act  the 
part  of  a private  citizen,  frequenting  the  temples,  schools, 
and  lecture-rooms  in  the  garb  of  a philosopher.  On  his  voy- 
age homeward  he  lingered  also  for  a time  at  Athens,  and,  to 
prove  himself  without  sin , in  the  true  spirit  of  the  Stoic  re- 
ligion, caused  himself  to  be  initiated  in  the  mysteries.3  In 
the  autumn  of  176  he  finally  reached  Italy,  landing  at  Brun- 
disium,  where  he  laid  aside  the  military  cloak  and  ensigns, 
and  entered  the  city  in  the  robe  of  peace.  The  senate  de- 
creed him  a triumph  over  the  Sarmatians,  in  Triumph  over 

...  , , . the  Sarmatians. 

which  the  young  (Jornmodus  was  also  associated.  a.d.  no. 
An  arch  was  erected  in  the  Campus  on  the  Flaminian  Way, 
which  was  standing  till  modern  times  : some  bas-reliefs  have 
been  saved  from  the  ruin,  which  represent  the  apotheosis  of 
Faustina.  Aurelius  sits  below,  gazing  with  The  Antonine 
affection  on  his  consort,  wafted  upwards  on  the  collimn- 
wings  of  a spirit.  The  graceful  column,  banded  like  that  of 
Trajan  with  spiral  sculpture,  on  which  his  exploits  are  re- 
corded, still  seems  to  follow  her  ascent  to  heaven.  It  was 
crowned  with  the  statue  of  the  emperor,  who  deserved  to 
share  with  Trajan  the  title  of  the  Best ; and  for  many  centuries 
these  two  noblest  products  of  heathen  culture,  in  the  realms 

herself  for  fear  of  her  complicity  with  Cassius  being  discovered ; others  that 
she  died  of  an  attack  of  gout. 

1 Capitol.  1.  c.  I do  not  know  how  else  to  interpret  “ apud  multas  (Orien- 
.ales  provineias)  philosophise  vestigia  reliquit.”  Philostratus  in  the  Lives  tells 
6ome  anecdotes  of  Aurelius  and  the  sophists,  and  also  mentions  that  he  was 
obliged  to  punish  the  incorrigible  Antiochians  by  interdicting  for  a time  their 
spectacles. 

2 Capitol,  e.  27.:  “ut  se  innocentem  probaret.”  Aurelius,  according  to 
Dion,  Ivxi.  31.,  instituted  salaried  teachers  of  all  sciences  at  Athens,  “ for  peo- 
ple of  all  nations  ; ” iraciv  avdptnxoig  dt,dacK.a\ovg  sttI  Tramjg  X6yov  Tzaiihiag 
uicdbv  eTrjaiov  ipepovrag,  which  seems  to  indicate  the  establishment  of  lectures 
in  various  languages.  If  so,  it  was  no  doubt  a novelty. 


474 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  176 


respectively  of  action  and  reflection,  occupied  the  preemi- 
nent elevation  which  Christian  piety  has  since  assigned  to 
St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul.1 

Shows  and  largesses,  as  usual,  followed,  some  administra- 
tive measures  were  promulgated,  Commodus  was  associated 
Renewal  of  war  the  Tribunitian  Power,  and  married  with 
matian^and"  modest  solemnities.  But  the  chief  of  the  empire 
Marcomanm.  COuld  not  resume  his  place  in  the  senate  and  the 
palace.  The  Sarmatians  had  been  triumphed  over ; never- 
theless, they  rose  again,  or  continued  still  in  arms.  The 
Marcomanni,  the  Hermunduri,  the  Quadi,  were  easily  tempted 
to  resume  them.2  The  efforts  of  the  last  ten  years  must  be 
repeated,  with  failing  confidence  and  diminished  strength, 
against  a foe  more  experienced,  and  perhaps  even  more  au- 
dacious. Aurelius  again  girded  on  his  armour, 

Aurelius  a^rain  . ° *-  7 

leaves  Rome  and  required  nis  son  to  attend  upon  linn.  He 

tiers,  and  gains  hurled  a blood-stained  javelin  before  the  temple 

of  Bellona  as  a defiance  and  proclamation  of  war, 

and  went  forth  to  confront  the  enemy.3  For  three  years  he 

continued  to  prosecute  his  sad  and  painful  task,  to  exhaust 

his  own  vigour,  and  the  vigour  of  the  empire,  in  a struggle 

in  which  ultimate  success  might  well  seem  hopeless.  Pie 

gained  at  least  one  considerable  success  by  the  hands  of  his 

lieutenant  Paternus,  and  was  hailed  Imperator  for  the  tenth 

time  by  the  soldiers.  The  historians,  indeed,  affirm  that  the 

crowning  victory  was  in  sight,  and  that  another  year  would 

have  sufficed  to  reduce  these  restless  foes  to  entire  subjec- 

1 That  this  column  was  originally  surmounted  by  a statue  of  the  emperor 
appears  from  the  medals.  This  statue  had  long  fallen,  when  Pope  Sixtus  Y.  re- 
placed it  in  1589  by  a figure  of  the  Apostle  Paul.  Bunsen’s  Rom.  iii.  3.  p.  330. 

2 Aurelius  had  required  the  Marcomanni  to  remove  to  a distance  of  38 
stadia  from  the  bank  of  the  Danube,  a very  trifling  demand,  and  appointed 
fixed  days  and  places  for  their  intercourse  with  the  Romans.  The  Iazyges  and 
Quadi  consented  to  restore  their  captives.  The  former  sent  back  as  many  as 
100,000 ; the  latter  notoriously  neglected  to  observe  this  condition.  Dion, 
lxxL  15,  16. 

8 Dion.  Ixxi.  33.,  adding,  wq  ye  /cal  tov  avyyevofiborv  avrf  rjnovaa.  Tha 
Solemnity  was  apparently  already  antiquated. 


A.  U.  929.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


475 


tion.'*  Tins,  however,  is  quite  incredible.  A decisive  victory 
might  have  compelled  them  to  offer  tribute,  but  probably  no 
victory  would  have  insured  their  paying  it.  Nor,  indeed, 
was  any  such  victory  now  to  be  gained,  and,  instead  of  their 
tribute  being  paid  to  the  Romans,  the  great  Sarmatian  war 
was  concluded  by  a peace  opportunely  bought  by  Rome. 
This  final  disgrace  Aurelius  did  not  live  himself  to  wit- 
ness. His  weakly  frame  sank  at  last  under  its  D~th  of  M_ 
fatigues,  and  he  was  still,  perhaps,  buoyed  up  Au^1™s]So. 
by  hopes  destined  never  to  be  accomplished,  a.  v.  933. 
when  he  was  rescued  from  impending  disappointment  by  a 
fever,  which  carried  him  off  in  his  camp  at  Yindobona.2 

The  despondency  which  had  seized  on  the  gentle  em- 
peror’s spirits  is  strongly  marked  in  the  circumstances  of  his 
last  hours.  While  anticipating  his  own  decease 

A ° Reflections  on 

with  satisfaction,  and  even  with  eagerness,  he  re-  the  death  of 

Aurelius. 

gamed  himselt  as  only  a fellow-traveller  on  the 
common  road  of  life  wTith  all  around  him,  and  took  leave  of 
his  friends  as  one  who  was  but  just  preceding  them.  If  he 
regarded  the  condition  of  public  affairs,  the  prospect  of  his 
son  succeeding  him  was  not  such  as  to  console  him ; for  he 

1 Capitol.  M.  Anton.  Phil.  1.  c. ; Dion,  1.  c. 

2 At  Yindobona  (Vienna),  according  to  Victor ; at  Sirmium,  according  to 
Tertullian,  Apol.  25.  He  seems  to  have  believed  himself  that  his  disorder  was 
natural,  for,  as  is  said,  he  desired  his  son  to  leave  him  that  he  might  avoid  the 
risk  of  infection.  Almost  his  last  words  were  a request  to  his  attendants  not 
to  grieve  for  him,  but  to  turn  their  thoughts  to  the  still  prevailing  pestilence, 
and  to  their  common  perils.  He  even  hastened  his  own  end  by  abstaining  from 
food.  Dion,  however,  affirms  for  certain,  that,  though  sick,  he  was  actually 
cut  off  by  poison,  administered  by  the  physicians  in  his  son’s  interest : ovx 
turd  rijc  vdcrov  rp>  nai  t6te  ev(>gt]G£v,  bXK  turo  tuv  laTpuv,  hy&>  ocupuc  rjKovuay 
tu>  K o/ifj65cp  xaPl^°/Ll^vlJV-  The  story  may  stand  or  fall  with  our  general  opin- 
ion of  Dion’s  veracity.  I am  sorry  to  take  leave  of  an  author  on  whom  I have 
had  to  lean  so  often  and  so  long,  with  the  expression  of  my  distrust  in  his 
sources  of  secret  history.  From  the  first  he  shows  a disposition  to  seize  on  the 
most  flagrant  imputations  conveyed  by  his  authorities,  and  as  he  approaches 
his  own  times  these  authorities  are  often  mere  private  anecdotists.  Capitoli* 
nus,  who  referred  to  Marius  Maximus  and  to  published  histories,  says  nothing 
of  this  pretended  crime,  nor  does  Herodian, 


176 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  180. 


could  not  hide  from  himself  that  Commodus  was  vicious, 
cruel,  and  illiterate.1  The  indulgence  he  had  shown  to  his 
consort’s  irregularities  might  be  pardoned  by  the  state,  to 
which  they  were  of  little  moment ; but  his  weakness  in  leav- 
ing to  his  graceless  offspring  the  command  of  a world-wide 
empire  must  reflect  more  strongly  on  his  memory.  He  may 
have  judged,  indeed,  that  the  danger  to  the  state  from  a had 
prince  was  less  than  the  danger  from  a disputed  succession, 
especially  in  the  face  of  the  disasters  accumulating  around  it. 
On  his  death-bed  he  warned  his  son  not  to  underrate  the 
peril  from  the  barbarians,  who,  if  at  the  moment  worsted  and 
discouraged,  would  soon  revive,  and  return  again  to  the  as- 
sault with  increasing  vigour.  And  so  he  left  the  laws  of  in- 
heritance, as  now  ordinarily  received,  to  take  their  course, 
indicating  his  will  that  Commodus  should  succeed  him  by 
the  simple  form  of  recommending  him  to  the  care  of  his  offi- 
cers, and  to  the  favour  of  the  immortal  gods.  On  the  seventh 
day  of  his  illness  he  admitted  none  but  his  unworthy  son  to 
his  chamber,  and  after  a few  words  dismissed  him,  covered 
his  head  for  sleep,  and  passed  away  alone  and  untended. 
Born  on  the  20th  of  April,  121,  and  dying  on  the  17th  of 
March,  180,  he  had  almost  completed  his  fifty-ninth  year. 
His  career  had  been  divided  into  three  nearly  equal  portions: 
the  first,  to  his  association  in  the  empire  with  Antoninus ; 
the  second,  to  his  accession  to  complete  sovereignty;  the 
third,  from  thence  to  his  decease.  The  first  was  the  season 
of  his  general  education,  the  second  that  of  his  training  for 
empire,  in  the  last  he  exercised  power  uncontrolled.  In  each 
he  had  acquitted  himself  well,  in  each  he  had  gained  himself 
love  and  admiration ; but  the  earlier  periods  were  eminently 
prosperous  and  happy ; the  crowning  period  was  a time  of 
trial,  of  peril,  fatigue,  distress  and  apprehension.  Historical 

1 Capitol.  M.  Anton.  Phil.  28. : “ fertur  filium  mori  voluisse,  cum  eum  talem 
videret  futurum,  qualis  exstitit  post  ejus  mortem  ; ne,  ut  ipse  dicebat,  similis  Ne- 
roni,  Caliguloe,  et  Domitiano  esset.”  His  last  words,  addressed  to  the  centurion 
of  the  watch,  according  to  Zonaras  (xii.  2),  were,  “ Turn  to  the  rising  sun,  foi 
I am  setting.” 


A.  D.  933.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


477 


parallels  between  men  of  different  times  and  circumstances 
are  very  apt  to  mislead  us,  yet  I cannot  refrain  from  indicat- 
ing the  comparison,  which  might  be  drawn  with  unusual 
precision,  between  the  wise,  the  virtuous,  the  much-suffering 
Aurelius,  and  our  own  great  and  good  king  Alfred.  Both 
arrived  early  and  unexpectedly  to  power ; both  M Aurelins 
found  their  people  harassed  by  the  attacks  of  im-  Aifredrtiie''lth 
portunate  enemies;  they  assumed  with  firmness  Great 
the  attitude  of  resistance  and  defence,  aud  gained  many  vic- 
tories in  the  field,  though  neither  could  fail  to  acknowledge 
the  unequal  conditions  of  the  struggle.  Both  found  them- 
selves at  the  head  of  a weak  aud  degenerate  society,  whose 
hour  of  dissolution  had  well-nigh  struck.  Nevertheless,  they 
contended  manfully  in  its  behalf,  and  strove  to  infuse  their 
own  gallant  spirit  into  a people  little  worthy  of  their  cham- 
pionship. But  Aurelius  and  Alfred  were  not  warriors  only. 
They  were  men  of  letters  by  natural  predilection  and  early 
habit ; they  were  legislators,  administrators,  and  philoso- 
phers, with  this  difference,  that  the  first  came  at  the  end  of  a 
long  course  of  civilized  government,  the  second  almost  at  its 
beginning  ; the  first  at  the  mournful  close  of  one  period  of 
mental  speculation,  the  second  at  the  fresh  and  hopeful  com- 
mencement of  another.  The  one  strove  to  elevate  the  charac- 
ter of  his  subjects  by  the  example  of  his  own  scrupulous 
self-examination ; the  other  by  precepts  of  obedience  to  an 
external  revelation.  But  both  were,  from  their  early  days, 
weak  in  body,  and  little  fit  to  cope  with  the  appalling  fatigues 
of  their  position ; both,  if  I mistake  not,  were  sick  at  heart, 
and  felt  that  their  task  was  beyond  their  power,  and  quitted 
life  prematurely,  with  little  reluctance.  In  one  respect,  how- 
ever, their  lot  was  different.  The  fortunes  of  the  people  of 
our  English  Alfred,  after  a brief  and  distant  period  of  obscu- 
ration, have  ever  increased  in  power  and  brightness,  like  the 
sun  ascending  to  its  meridian.  The  decline  of  which  Aurelius 
was  the  melancholy  witness  was  irremediable  and  final,  and 
his  pale  solitary  star  was  the  last  apparent  in  the  Roman  fir- 
mament. 


478 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  180. 


The  circumstances  of  the  empire  might  indeed  well  in- 
spire profound  anxiety  in  the  breast  of  one  to  whom  its  main- 
tenance was  confided.  Hitherto  we  have  seen 

The  barbarian 

now  stronger  the  frontiers  assailed  in  many  quarters,  and  the 

and  the  empire  . . . . 

weaker  than  of  energies  oi  the  bravest  prmces  tasked  m their 
defence.  But  these  attacks  have  been  local  and 
desultory.  The  Ghatti  on  the  Rhine,  the  Marcomanni  on  the 
Upper,  the  Sarmatians  on  the  Lower  Danube,  the  Roxolani 
on  the  shores  of  the  Euxine,  have  often  assailed  and  vexed 
the  provinces,  but  separately  and  at  different  times ; Aure- 
lius had  to  make  head  against  all  these  enemies  at  once.  The 
unity  of  the  empire  imparted  a germ  of  union  to  its 
assailants.  Hence  no  champion  of  Rome  had  so  hard  a task ; 
hence  Aurelius,  far  from  making  permanent  conquests  beyond 
his  frontiers,  stood  everywhere  on  the  defensive,  and  con- 
fronted the  foe  by  his  lieutenants  in  Gaul,  Pannonia,  Dacia 
or  Moesia,  while  he  planted  himself  commonly  in  the  centre 
of  his  line  of  stations,  at  Carnuntum,  Vindobona,  or  Sirmiuro  ; 
hence  his  wars  were  protracted  through  a period  of  twelve 
years,  and  though  his  partial  victories  gained  him  ten  times 
the  title  of  Imperator,  none  was  sufficiently  decisive  to  break 
the  forces  banded  against  him.  The  momentary  submission 
of  one  tribe  or  another  led  to  no  general  result ; notwithstand- 
ing his  own  sanguine  hopes,  and  the  fond  persuasion  of  his 
countrymen,  his  last  campaign  saw  the  subjugation  of  Scy- 
thia and  the  safety  of  the  empire  still  distant  and  doubtful. 
The  barbarians  were  stronger  at  this  crisis  than  ever,  strong 
in  unity,  stronger  in  arms  and  tactics,  stronger  possibly  in 
numbers.  Neither  to  Marius,  we  may  believe,  nor  to  Ger- 
manicus,  nor  to  Trajan,  would  they  now  have  yielded  as 
heretofore.  But  the  empire  was  at  least  as  much  weakei. 
The  symptoms  of  decline,  indeed,  were  as  yet  hardly  manifest 
to  common  observation ; under  ordinary  circumstances  they 
might  still  have  eluded  the  notice  even  of  statesmen ; but  in 
the  stress  of  a great  calamity  they  became  manifest  to  all. 
The  chief  of  the  state  was  deeply  impressed  with  them. 
Against  anxiety  and  apprehension  he  struggled  as  a matter 


A.  U.  933.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


479 


decline  of  tho 
empire;  con- 
traction of 
monetary 
transactions 
from  the  dimi- 
nution of  the 
circulating  me- 
dium. 


of  duty,  but  the  effort  was  sore  and  hopeless ; and  from  the 
anticipation  of  disasters  beyond  his  control  he  escaped,  when 
possible,  to  pensive  meditations  on  his  own  moral  nature, 
which  at  least  might  lie  within  it 

The  brilliancy  of  the  city,  and  the  great  provincial  cap- 
itals, the  magnificence  of  their  shows  and  entertainments,  still 
remained,  perhaps,  undimmed.  The  dignity  of  symp'omsof 
the  temples  and  palaces  of  Greece  and  Rome 
stood,  even  in  their  best  days,  in  marked  con- 
trast with  the  discomfort  and  squalor  of  their 
lanes  and  cabins.  The  spacious  avenues  of  ISTero 
concealed  perhaps  more  miserable  habitations 
than  might  be  seen  in  the  narrow  streets  of  Augustus;  but 
as  yet  we  hear  no  distinct  murmurs  of  poverty  among  the 
populace.  The  causes,  indeed,  were  already  at  work  which, 
in  the  second  or  third  generation,  reduced  the  people  of  the 
towns  to  pauperism,  and  made  the  public  service  an  intolera- 
ble burden ; the  decline,  namely,  of  agriculture  and  com- 
merce, the  isolation  of  the  towns,  the  disappearance  of  the 
precious  metals,  the  return  of  society  to  a state  of  barter,  in 
which  every  petty  community  strove  to  live  on  its  own  im- 
mediate produce.  Such,  at  a later  period,  was  the  condition 
of  the  empire,  as  revealed  in  the  codes  of  the  fourth  century. 
These  symptoms  were  doubtless  strongly  developed  in  the 
third,  but  we  have  at  least  no  evidence  of  them  in  the  second. 
We  may  reasonably  suppose,  indeed,  that  there  was  a grad- 
ual, though  slow,  diminution  in  the  amount  of  gold  and  silver 
in  circulation.  The  result  would  be  felt  first  in  the  provinces, 
and  latest  in  the  cities  and  Rome  itself,  but  assuredly  it  was 
already  in  progress.  Two  texts  of  Pliny  assert  the  constant 
Train  of  specie  to  the  East ; and  the  assertion  is  confirmed  by 
the  circumstances  of  the  case ; for  the  Indians,  and  the  nations 
beyond  India,  who  transmitted'  to  the  W est  their  silks  and 
spices,  cared  little  for  the  wines  and  oils  of  Europe,  still  less 
for  the  manufactures  in  wool  and  leather  which  formed  the 
staples  of  commerce  in  the  Mediterranean.1  There  was  still 

1 Plin.  Hist.  Nat.  vi.  26.,  xii.  41.  The  sums  are  stated  at  400,000?,  an 
aually  to  India,  and  800,000?.  to  the  East  generally. 


480 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  180. 


a great,  perhaps  an  increasing  demand,  for  these  metals  in 
■works  of  art  and  ornament,  and  much  was  consumed  in  daily 
use,  much  withdrawn  from  circulation  and  eventually  lost  by 
the  thriftless  habit  of  hoarding.  But  the  supply  from  the 
mines  of  Thrace,  Spain,  and  Germany  was  probably  declin- 
ing, for  it  was  extracted  by  forced  labour,  the  most  expen- 
sive, the  most  harassing,  and  the  most  precarious.  The 
difficulty  of  maintaining  the  yield  of  the  precious  metals  is 
marked  in  the  severe  regulations  of  the  later  emperors,  and 
is  further  attested  by  the  progressive  debasement  of  the  cur- 
rency.1 

Not  more  precise  is  our  information  respecting  the  move- 
ment of  the  population,  which  was  also  at  this  period  on  the 
Decrease  in  the  verge  of  decline.  To  the  partial  complaints  of 
population,  such  a decline  in  Italy,  muttered,  as  they  gen- 
erally were,  by  the  poets  or  satirists,  I have  hitherto  paid 
little  heed.  In  statements  of  this  kind  there  is  generally 
much  false  sentiment,  some  angry  misrepresentation.  The 
and  substitu-  substitution  of  slave  for  free  labour  in  many  parts 
fomree  labour  °f  Italy,  may  have  had  the  appearance  of  a de- 
the  number  of  population,  while  it  actually  indicated  no 

slaves.  more  than  a movement  and  transfer.  It  was 

more  important,  however,  in  the  future  it  foreshadowed  than 
in  the  present  reality.  The  slave  population  was  not  repro- 
ductive ; it  was  only  kept  at  its  level  by  fresh  drafts  from 
abroad.  Whenever  the  supply  should  be  cut  off,  the  residue 
would  rapidly  dwindle.  This  supply  was  maintained  partly 
by  successful  wars,  but  still  more  by  a regular  and  organized 
traffic.  The  slaves  from  the  North  might  be  exchanged  for 
Italian  manufactures  and  produce ; but  the  vendors  from 
many  parts,  such  as  Arabia  and  Ethiopia,  central  Africa,  and 
even  Cappadocia  and  other  districts  of  Asia  Minor,  would 
take,  I suppose,  nothing  but  specie.  With  the  contraction 
of  the  currency,  the  trade  would  languish,  and  under  this 
depression  a country  like  Italy,  which  was  almost  wholly 


Cod.  Justin,  xi.  § '7.  4,  Y.  Akerman’s  Roman  Coins , p.  xiv. 


A.  U.  933.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


481 


stocked  by  importation,  would  become  quickly  depopulated. 
Still  more,  on  tbe  decline  of  the  slave  population,  there  would 
follow  a decline  of  production,  a decline  in  the  means  of  the 
proprietors,  a decline  in  the  condition  of  the  free  classes,  and 
consequently  in  then’  numbers  also.  That  such  a decline 
was  actually  felt  under  the  Flavian  emperors,  appears  in  the 
sudden  adoption  of  the  policy  of  alimentation,  or  public  aid 
to  impoverished  freemen.1 

N or  was  it  in  this  way  only  that  slavery  tended  to  the 
decline  of  population.  Slavery  in  ancient,  and  doubtless  in 
all  times,  was  a hot-bed  of  vice  and  selfish  indul-  Effects  of  Tieei 
gence,  enervating  the  spirit  and  vital  forces  of  S£n 
mankind,  discouraging  legitimate  marriage,  and  of  slavery- 
enticing  to  promiscuous  and  barren  concubinage.  The  fruit 
of  such  hateful  unions,  if  fruit  there  were,  or  could  be,  en- 
gaged little  regard  from  their  selfish  fathers,  and  both  law 
and  usage  continued  to  sanction  the  exposure  of  infants,  from 
which  the  female  sex  undoubtedly  suffered  most.2  The  losses 
of  Italy  from  this  horrid  practice  were  probably  the  greatest ; 
but  the  provinces  also  lost  proportionably  ; the  imitation  of 
Roman  habits  was  rife  on  the  remotest  frontiers;  the  con- 
quests of  the  empire  were  consolidated  by  the  attractions  of 
Roman  indulgence  and  sensuality ; slavery  threw  discredit 

1 We  have  seen  that  M.  Aurelius  instituted  a new  foundation  of  this  kind 
in  honour  of  Faustina.  His  bad  successor  seized  upon  these  and  similar  funds. 
Pertinax  found  the  alimentations  nine  years  in  arrear,  and  at  the  same  timo 
such  a deficit  in  his  treasury,  that  it  was  impossible  to  revive  them.  Capitol. 
Periin.  9.  They  were  restored,  however,  or  replaced  by  new  foundations,  ir 
more  favourable  times.  Lamprid.  Alex.  Sev.  5*1. 

'J  I have  touched  on  this  subject  in  Chapter  XL.  It  is  not  necessary  to  re 
fer  to  texts  for  the  commonness  of  infanticide  among  the  ancients.  Tacituf 
specifies  the  Jews  and  the  Germans  as  remarkable  exceptions.  {Hut.  v.  5. 
Germ.  19.)  That  the  practice  was  still  ip  use  in  the  third  century  appears  floir 
the  Digest,  xxviii.  2. ; nor  was  it  forbidden,  even  by  the  Christian  emperors,  be 
fors  Yalentiniau.  That  such  was  the  fate  of  female  oftener  than  of  male  chil- 
dren may  be  easily  supposed.  So  Terence,  Heaut.  iv.  1.  12.  “ Meministin’  me 

gravidam,  et  mihi  te  maximo  opere  edicere,  Si  puellam  parerem,  nolle  tolli  ? ” 
and  Apuleius,  Metam.  x.  p 722. ; Tertullian,  Ad.  Nat.  15.  See  C.  G.  Zumpt. 
Bevolkerung  im  Allerthum , p.  70 

136  vol.  vii. — 


482 


HIST0R1  OP  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  180 


on  all  manual  labour,  and  engendered  a false  sentiment  of 
honour,  which  constrained  the  poorer  classes  of  freemen  to 
dependence  and  celibacy  ; Tice  and  idleness  went  hand  in 
hand,  and  combined  to  stunt  the  moral  and  physical  growth 
of  the  Roman  citizen,  leaving  his  weak  and  morbid  frame  ex- 
posed in  an  unequal  contest  to  the  fatal  influences  of  his  cli- 
mate, 

If,  however,  the  actual  amount  of  population  in  Italy  and 
other  metropolitan  districts  had  but  lately  begun  sensibly  to 
decline,  for  some  generations  it  had  been  recruited  mainly 
from  a foreign  stock,  and  was  mingled  with  the  refuse  of 
every  nation,  civilized  and  barbarian.1 2 3  Slaves,  freedmen, 
clients  of  the  rich  and  powerful,  had  glided  by  adoption  into 
the  Roman  gentes,  the  names  of  which  still  retained  a falla- 
cious air  of  antiquity,  while  their  members  had  lost  the  feel- 
ings and  principles  which  originally  signalized  them.  As 
late  as  the  time  of  the  younger  Pliny,  we  find  the  gentile 
names  of  the  republic  still  common,  though  many  of  them 
have  ceased  to  recur  on  the  roll  of  the  great  magistracies, 
where  they  have  been  supplanted  by  others,  hitherto  obscure 
or  unknown  ; but  the  surnames  of  Pliny’s  friends  and  corre- 
spondents, which  distinguish  the  family  from  the  house,  are 
in  numerous  instances  strange  to  us,  and  often  grotesque 
and  barbarous.  The  gradual  exhaustion  of  the  true  Roman 

1 Plin.  Hist.  Nat.  iii  24.,  seems  to  intimate  that,  in  his  opinion,  there  was  a 
great  decline  of  population  in  Italy  since  the  time  when  (in  the  third  century, 
b.  c.)  she  had  armed  *700,000  foot  and  *70,000  horse.  Plutarch,  De  Defect 
Ora.  c.  8.,  says  that  Greece,  in  his  day,  maintained  only  3,000  hoplites.  Such 
statements  are  fallacious.  We  may  observe  that  in  the  heat  of  the  great  Eu- 
ropean war,  at  the  beginning  of  this  century,  Great  Britain  had  a force  of 
800,000  men  of  all  arms  and  services,  while  ten  years  ago,  being  a time  of  pro- 
found peace,  she  had  not,  perhaps,  a quarter  of  that  number,  yet  her  popula- 
tion had  nearly  doubled.  There  seems,  however,  to  be  direct  evidence  that 
parts  both  of  Greece  and  Italy  had  much  declined  even  in  the  second  century. 

2 There  can  be  no  question  of  the  fact,  though  the  texts  referring  to  it  bear 
a rhetorical  complexion.  See,  for  instance,  Seneca,  Ad  Helv.  5. : “ videbis  ma- 

jorem  partem  esse,  quar  relictis  sedibus  suis  venerit  in  maximam  quidem  et 
pulcherrimam  urbem,  nor.  tamen  suam.” 


A.U.  933.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


48a 


blood  bad  been  already  marked  and  deplored  under  Claudius, 
and  there  can  be  no  doubt,  though  materials  are  wanting  for 
tracing  it,  that  the  flux  continued  to  gather  force  through 
succeeding  generations.1 

The  decay  of  moral  principles  which  hastened  the  disinte- 
gration of  Roman  society  was  compensated  by  no  new  dis- 
coveries in  material  cultivation.  The  idea  of  L5m5ts  0f  mi- 
civilization  common  to  the  Greeks  and  Romans  Sent  inanSent 
was  the  highest  development  of  the  bodily  fac-  cmllzatlon- 
ulties,  together  with  the  imagination ; but  in  exploring  the 
agencies  of  the  natural  world,  and  turning  its  forces  to  the 
use  of  man,  the  progress  soon  reached  its  limits.  The  Greeks 
and  Romans  were  almost  equally  unsteady  in  tracing  the 
laws  of  physical  phenomena,  which  they  empirically  ob- 
served, and  analysing  the  elements  of  the  world  around 
them.  Their  advance  in  applied  science  stopped  short  with 
the  principles  of  mechanics,  in  which  they  doubtless  attained 
great  practical  proficiency.  Roman  engineering,  especially, 
deserves  the  admiration  even  of  our  own  times.  But  the 
ancients  invented  no  instrument  for  advancing  the  science  of 
astronomy ; they  remained  profoundly  ignorant  of  the  mys- 
teries of  chemistry ; their  medicine,  notwithstanding  the 
careful  diagnosis  of  Hippocrates  and  Galen,  could  not  free 
itself  from  connexion  with  the  most  trivial  superstitions. 
The  Greeks  speculated  deeply  in  ethics  and  politics;  the  Ro- 
mans were  intelligent  students  of  legal  theory  and  proce- 

1 Tac.  Ann.  xiii.  27. : “ plurimis  equitum,  plerisque  senatoribus  non  aliunde 
originem  trahi.”  Zumpt,  Bevolkerung  im  Alierthum , p.  37.,  suspects  that 
Tacitus  himself  was  of  servile  origin.  I observe  above  forty  surnames  in  Pliny’s 
letters  which  are  not  to  be  found  in  the  Onomasticon  to  Cicero.  Of  these 
there  are  three  classes  on  which  I should  fix  as  probably  indicating  servile  ori- 
gin: 1.  Greek:  as  Archippus,  Apollinaris,  Aristo,  Eumolpus,  Polyaanus,  Thra- 
sea : 2.  National ; as  Africus,  Hispanus,  Macedo,  Mauricus,  Sardus : 3.  Names 
of  quality  or  circumstance,  as  Genialis,  Praesens,  Restitutus,  Robustus,  Pudens, 
Rusticus,  Tacitus,  Tiro,  Tranquillus.  Statius,  according  to  Funccius,  Be  Ling. 
Lai.  v.  197.,  is  a servile  name,  “a  stando.”  I have  before  remarked  how 
many  of  the  sophists  at  Athens  and  elsewhere  claimed  connexion  with  noble 
Roman  families.  They  were  freedmen  and  clients  of  Roman  houses. 


184 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


[A.D.  180. 


dure ; but  neither  could  discover  from  these  elementary 
sciences  the  compound  ideas  of  public  economy.  Their  prin- 
ciples of  commerce  and  finance  were  to  the  last  rude  and  un- 
philosophical.  They  made  little  advance,  at  the  height  of 
their  prosperity  and  knowledge,  in  the  economy  of  labour 
and  production ; they  made  no  provision  for  the  support  of 
the  increasing  numbers  to  which  the  human  race,  under  the 
operation  of  natural  laws,  ought  to  have  attained.  We  read 
of  no  improvements  in  the  common  processes  of  agriculture, 
none  even  in  the  familiar  mode  of  grinding  corn,  none  in  the 
extraction  and  smelting  of  ores,  none  in  the  art  of  navigation. 
Even  in  war,  to  which  they  so  ardently  devoted  themselves, 
we  find  the  helmet  and  cuirass,  the  sword,  spear,  and  buck- 
ler, identical  in  character  and  almost  in  form,  from  the  siege 
of  Troy  to  the  sack  of  Rome.  Changes  in  tactics  and  disci- 
pline were  slight  and  casual,  compelled  rather  by  some 
change  in  circumstances  than  spontaneous  or  scientific.  The 
ancient  world  had,  in  short,  no  versatility,  no  power  of 
adaptation  to  meet  the  varying  wants  of  its  outward  con- 
dition. Its  ideas  were  not  equal  to  the  extension  of  its  ma- 
terial dominion.  A little  soul  was  lodged  in  a vast  body. 

The  Egyptian  civilization,  the  Hindoo,  the  Chinese,  as 
well  as  the  Greek  and  Roman,  have  all  had  their  natural 
limits,  at  which  their  vitality  was  necessarily 
arrested.  Possibly  all  civilizations  are  subject 
to  a similar  law,  though  some  may  have  a 
wider  scope  and  a more  enduring  force  than 
others  ; or  possibly  there  may  be  a real  salt  of  society  in 
the  principle  of  intelligent  freedom,  which  has  first  learnt 
to  control  itself,  that  it  may  deserve  to  escape  from  the  con- 
trol of  external  forces.  But  Roman  society,  at  least,  was 
animated  by  no  such  principle.  At  no  period  within  the 
sjihere  of  historic  records  was  the  commonwealth  of  Rome 
anything  but  an  oligarchy  of  warriors  and  slave-owners,  who 
indemnified  themselves  for  the  restraint  imposed  on  them  by 
their  equals  in  the  forum  by  aggression  abroad  and  tyranny 
in  their  households.  The  causes  of  its  decline  seem  tc  have 


The  decline  of 
Roman  civili- 
zation dates 
from  before  the 
fall  of  the  Re- 
public. 


A.  U.  933.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


485 


little  connexion  with  the  form  of  government  established  in 
the  first  and  second  centuries.  They  were  in  full  operation 
before  the  fall  of  the  Republic,  though  their  baneful  effects 
were  disguised  and  perhaps  retarded  by  outward  successes, 
by  extended  conquests,  and  increasing  supplies  of  tribute  or 
plunder.  The  general  decline  of  population  throughout  the 
ancient  world  may  be  dated  even  from  the  second  century 
before  our  era.  The  last  age  of  the  Republic  was  perhaps 
the  period  of  the  most  rapid  exhaustion  of  the  human 
race ; but  its  dissolution  was  arrested  under  Augustus,  when 
the  population  recovered  for  a time  in  some  quarters  of  the 
empire,  and  remained  at  least  stationary  in  others.  The 
curse  of  slavery  could  not  but  make  itself  felt  again,  and  de- 
manded the  destined  catastrophe.  Whatever  evil  we  ascribe 
to  the  despotism  of  the  Caesars,  we  must  remark  that  it  was 
Slavery  that  rendered  political  freedom  and  constitutional 
government  impossible.  Slavery  fostered  in  Rome,  as  pre- 
viously at  Athens,  the  spirit  of  selfishness  and  sensuality,  of 
lawlessness  and  insolence,  which  cannot  consist  with  political 
equality,  with  political  justice,  with  political  moderation. 
The  tyranny  of  the  emperors  was,  as  I have  elsewhere  ob- 
served, only  the  tyranny  of  every  noble  extended  and  inten- 
sified. The  empire  became  no  more  than  an  ergastulum  or 
barracoon  on  a vast  scale,  commensurate  with  the  dominions 
of  the  greatest  of  Roman  slaveholders.  It  is  vain  to  imagine 
that  a people  can  be  tyrants  in  private  life,  and  long  escape 
subjection  to  a common  tyrant  in  public.  It  was  more  than 
they  could  expect,  more,  indeed,  than  they  deserved,  if  they 
found  in  Augustus,  at  least,  and  Vespasian,  in  Trajan  and 
Hadrian,  in  Antoninus  and  Aurelius,  masters  who  sought 
spontaneously  to  divest  themselves  of  the  most  terrible  at- 
tributes of  their  boundless  autocracy. 

We  have  noticed  already  the  pestilence  which  befell  Italy 
and  many  of  the  provinces  in  the  reign  of  Aurelius.  There 
is  reason  to  believe  that  this  scourge  was  no  The  effect  of 
common  disorder,  that  it  was  of  a type  new  at  other' 
least  in  the  West,  and  that,  as  a new  morbific  tt”ema-S 
agent,  its  ravages  were  more  lasting,  as  well  as  ^s7  disaa‘ 


486 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  ISO 


more  severe,  than  those  of  an  ordinary  sickness.  This 
plague,  for  it  seems  to  merit  the  specific  name,  was  ob- 
served by  the  great  physician  Galen,  to  whom  it  appeared 
as  a new  and  startling  phenomenon.1 2  He  has  given  some 
account  of  its  symptoms,  and,  though  its  course  and  action 
are  little  known  to  us,  there  seems  ground  for  believing  that 
it  formed  an  era  in  ancient  medicine.  At  another  time,  when 
the  stamina  of  ancient  life  were  healthier  and  stronger,  such 
a visitation  might  possibly  have  come  and  gone,  and,  how- 
ever fatal  at  the  moment,  have  left  no  lasting  traces ; but 
periods  seem  to  occur  in  national  existence  when  there  is  no 
constitutional  power  of  rallying  uuder  casual  disorders.3 * * * * 8  The 
sickness  which  in  the  youth  of  the  commonwealth  would 
have  dispelled  its  morbid  humours  and  fortified  its  system, 
may  have  proved  fatal  to  its  advancing  years,  and  precipi- 
tated a hale  old  age  into  palsied  decrepitude.  The  vital 
powers  of  the  empire  possessed  no  elasticity ; every  blow 
now  told  upon  it  with  increasing  force ; the  blows  it  slowly 
or  impatiently  returned  were  given  by  the  hands  of  hired 
barbarians,  not  by  the  strength  of  its  own  right  arm.  Hot 
sickness  alone,  but  famines,  earthquakes,  and  conflagrations, 
fell  in  rapid  succession  upon  the  capital  and  the  provinces.3 

1 I have  not  seen  Prof.  Hecker’s  Commentatio  de  Pcste  Antoniniana , 1835, 
in  which  the  little  that  is  known  of  this  plague  is  said  to  be  collected  and  ex- 
amined. Zumpt  refers  to  the  description  of  the  symptoms  by  Galen : “ Pus- 
tules appeared  on  the  body,  accompanied  with  inward  heat  and  putrid  breath, 
with  hoarseness  and  cough.  If  the  impostumes  broke  there  was  a chance  for 
the  patient’s  life,  but  if  not,  he  was  certain  to  die.  Diarrhoea  set  in,  and  was 
the  surest  token  of  death.” — Bevolkerung  im  Alterthum,  p.  85.  note. 

2 Niebuhr  has  expressed  the  opinion  that  “ the  ancient  world  never  recov- 

ered from  the  blow  inflicted  upon  it  by  the  plague  which  visited  it  in  the  reign 
of  M.  Aurelius.”  ( Lectures  on  Roman  Hist.  ii.  282.)  His  comparison  of  its 

effects  to  those  of  the  great  plague  at  Athens  may  be  fanciful,  to  those  of  the 

Black  Death  of  the  middle  ages  more  fanciful  still.  The  apparent  degeneracy 

of  English  society  after  the  plague  of  London  might  have  served  him  for  an- 
other illustration.  But  society  soon  recovers  from  such  calamities,  if  its  con- 
stitution is  sound.  It  is  in  the  decay  of  nations  that  such  blows  form  real  his 

tori cal  epochs. 

8 Zumpt,  Bland  der  BevoUcerung , p.  84.,  gives  a long  list  of  earthquakes, 


A.  U.  933.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


487 


Such  casualties  may  have  occurred  at  other  periods  not  less 
frequently  or  disastrously;  hut  these  were  observed,  while 
the  others  passed  unnoticed,  because  the  courage  of  the  na- 
tion was  now  broken  no  less  than  its  physical  vigour,  and, 
distressed  and  terrified,  it  beheld  in  every  natural  disorder 
the  stroke  of  fate,  the  token  of  its  destined  dissolution. 

Nor  indeed  was  the  alarm  unfounded.  These  transient 
faintings  and  sicknesses  were  too  truly  the  symptoms  of  aj> 
Broaching  collarise.  The  long  line  of  the  north- 

1 ° 1 ° Desperate  es- 

ern  frontier,  from  Odessus  to  the  island  of  the  pedients  forre- 
_ . , » „„  , sisting  the  at- 

Jdatavi,  was  skirted  by  a fringe  ot  fire,  and  tack  of  the  bar- 

through  the  lurid  glare  loomed  the  wrathful  faces 

of  myriads,  Germans,  Scythians,  and  Sarmatians,  all  armed 

for  the  onslaught  iu  sympathy  or  concert.  To  buy  off  the 

attack  with  bribes  and  blackmail ; to  deaden  the  shock  by 

introducing  other  barbarians  within  the  borders,  on  whom 

the  first  blow  might  fall,  and  possibly  be  repelled  ; to  recruit 

the  stricken  remnant  of  the  legions  with  strangers,  slaves, 

and  the  refuse  of  the  streets  ; such  were  the  resources  of  the 

coward,  the  crafty,  or  the  desperate ; but  little  trust  was 

placed,  perhaps,  in  any  of  them.  The  people  . 

were  smitten  with  an  access  of  superstitious  de-  perstitkms  ob- 
. . „ _ . . servances. 

votion ; they  breathed  fresh  warmth  into  their 
ancient  ceremonies,  and  fanned  to  brighter  flame  their  slum- 
bering altar-fires ; they  sought  again  the  long-derided  oracles, 
and  revolved  prophetic  scrolls  with  trembling  eagerness; 
they  raised  new  shrines  to  every  deity  whose  power  might 
temper  for  then’  preservation  the  air  and  the  water,  the  sun- 
shine or  the  moonshine.1  They  sacrificed  many  hecatombs ; but 

famines,  and  pestilences,  from  Augustus  downwards.  The  plague  of  Aurelius 
had  a second  outbreak  under  Commodus  (Dion,  lxxii.  14.),  in  which  2,000  died 
in  Rome  daily.  Another  pestilence,  more  general  and  more  terrible,  is  recorded 
about  260.  See  particularly  Zosimus,  i.  26.,  and  Euseb.  Hist.  Eccl.  vii.  21. 

The  moral  effect  of  these  visitations  in  the  middle  of  the  third  century  is 
marked  by  the  revival  worship  of  all  the  deities  supposed  to  have  salutary  in- 
fluence in  such  cases,  as  of  Apollo,  Juno,  Diana,  Mars,  Mercury,  Liber,  Nep- 
tune, Vulcan,  Hercules,  and  iEsculapius.  This  may  be  traced  on  medals  from 


488 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.H  180. 


tlie  blood  of  bulls  and  lambs  no  longer  reassured  the  fainting 
heart  of  the  worshippers ; under  the  Republic  Gauls  and 
Greeks  had  been  buried  alive  in  the  comitium  in  moments  of 
public  calamity;  and  in  the  age  of  Aurelius  victims  were 
sought  among  members,  not  of  a foreign  nation,  but  of  a hos- 
Persecntion  of  tile  faith.  The  first  persecution  of  the  Christians 
the  chiistians.  lin(Jer  Hero  I have  ascribed  to  popular  indigna- 
tion at  the  unruly  temper  of  the  Jews,  with  whom  they  were 
at  first  confounded,  and  by  whom  they  were  discovered  and 
denounced.  The  procedure,  once  established  against  them 
in  the  capital  on  a special  occasion,  was  extended  abroad  by 
zealous  officials,  and  inflamed  by  the  stubborn  and  mutinous 
spirit  which  seemed  alone  to  animate  them.  Trajan  treated 
Christianity  as  a breach  of  state  discipline ; but  Hadrian,  less 
of  a martinet  and  more  of  a speculative  thinker,  controlled  in 
part  the  assiduity  of  the  proconsular  courts-martial.  Antoni- 
nus, at  peace  with  himself  and  with  all  the  world,  entertained 
no  jealousy  or  anger  towards  these  harmless  sectaries,  and  was 
willing  to  allay  the  exasperation  which  the  troubles  of  the 
provinces  engendered  against  them.  But  Aurelius  regarded 
the  crime  of  Christianity,  the  crime  of  refusing  to  worship 
the  gods,  not  as  an  outbreak  of  turbulence  and  disobedience, 
but  as  an  insult  to  the  majesty  of  the  national  divinities,  and 
the  preeminence  of  the  national  cult.  As  a philosopher  he 
cherished  himself  no  faith  in  the  deities  of  the  Capitol ; 1 but, 

the  emperor  Gallus.  Eckhel,  Dodr.  Xumm.  vii.  35V,  foil. ; Zumpt,  p.  86.  The 
worship  of  iEsculapius  appears  to  have  spread  at  this  period,  particularly  in 
Asia  Minor.  It  is  frequently  noticed  by  Aristides,  Celsus,  and  Apuleius.  Jus- 
tin Martyr  remarks  that  the  miracles  of  Jesus  Christ  were  compared  to  the 
wonderful  works  of  the  God  of  healing.  (Apol.  i.  84.)  The  era  is  also 
marked  by  the  appearance  of  pretenders  to  miraculous  healing  powers  ; new 
and  mysterious  remedies  came  into  repute ; experiments  were  made  on  the  ner- 
vous system  like  those  we  call  mesmeric,  all  calculated  to  enhance  the  idea  of 
a divine  interference  in  the  healing  of  diseases.  See  Greswell,  p.  314.,  whose 
explanation  of  these  circumstances,  as  mere  rivalry  with  the  Christian  miracles, 
seems  to  me  inadequate. 

1 See,  for  instance,  M.  Anton.  Comment,  v.  8. : ottoiSv  ion  to  fay6/jevo* 
In  owira^tP  6 ’ AoM/moc  Toirtp  Innaolav , ^ il>vxpo'Aovoiav)  fj  avvTcoSrjclov 


A.  U.  933.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


489 


as  emperor,  lie  paid  not  the  less  respect  to  the  fabled  objects 
of  vulgar  adoration;  nor  could  he  excuse  the  horror  with 
which  the  Christians  shrank  from  joining  formally  in  a ser- 
vice which  the  chief  of  the  state  deemed  innocent  and  deco- 
rous.1 These  august  shadows  had  nerved  the  arms  of  a line 
of  heroes ; these  potent  names  had  swayed  the  imperator  in 
the  field  and  the  consul  in  the  senate-house.  They  existed 
at  least  in  the  realities  they  had  effected ; in  the  deeds  they 
had  produced,  in  the  resolutions  they  had  inspired.  Under 
their  influence  the  empire  had  waxed  and  flourished ; the  act- 
ual crisis  of  her  fortunes  was  not  the  moment  to  test  their 
value  by  a wanton  defiance.  The  firmness  of  the  Christians 
seemed  to  Aurelius  strange  and  unnatural.  He  scanned  it  as 
a marvel  before  he  resented  it  as  a crime.3  In  another  gen- 
eration the  emperors  will  cease  to  reason  or  reflect  on  the 
phenomenon  at  all.  The  increasing  disasters  of  the  state 
will  seem  to  them,  as  they  seemed  already  to  the  multitude, 
a proof  of  the  anger  of  the  gods  against  the  most  formidable 
enemies  of  Olympus.3 

The  extent  to  which  this  persecution  was  carried  under 
Aurelius  is  shown  by  records  fully  entitled  to  our  reliance, 
whence  we  learn  that  many  professors  of  the  faith,  of  every 
condition  and  of  either  sex,  were  put  cruelly  to  death  both 
in  the  East  and.  West.  Of  these  victims  Melito,  Martyrdoms 
bishop  of  Sardis,  and  Polycarp,  bishop  of  Smyrna,  cLpklPotMDuy^ 
were  the  most  distinguished ; but  the  martyrdom  1111(1  Blandina- 

roeovrSv  eon  nal  to,  avvera^ev  to'vtci  fj  t&v  oluv  <j>voig  vboov , r]  irrjpumv,  t) 
a’Kopo^fyv. 

1 Thus  Seneca,  as  quoted  by  Augustin,  Be  Civitate  Bei,  vi.  10. : “ memineri- 
mus  cultum  ejus  magis  ad  morem  quam  ad  rem  pertinere.” 

2 M.  Anton.  Comment,  xi.  3. : fii)  Kara  ipBijv  irapara^iv,  ag  ol  XpionavoL 

3 During  the  ages  of  persecution  the  Christian  apologists  very  naturally  set 
themselves  to  show  that  the  calamities  of  the  empire  were  such  as  had  occurred 
before,  and  could  not  be  ascribed  to  the  new  religion.  So  Arnobius,  Adv. 
Gentes,  i.  4. : “ quando  est  humanum  genus  aquarura  diluviis  interemplmn  ? non 
ante  nos  ? quando  mundus  incensus  in  favillas  et  cineres  dissolutus  est  ? non 
ante  nos  ? quando  urbes  amplissimEe  marinis  coopert®  sunt  fluctibus  ? non 
ante  nos  ? quando  cum  feris  bella,  et  prselia  cum  leonibus  gesta  sunt  ? non  ante 
nos  ? ” 


190 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  180. 


of  Pothinus,  Ponticus  and  Blandina,  at  Lyons,  has  been  com* 
memorated  by  the  Church  with  no  less  affectionate  devotion.1 * 
The  rescripts  of  Trajan  and  Hadrian,  which  forbade  the 
Christians  to  be  sought  out,  and  menaced  their  accusers  with 
punishment,  were  abrogated  or  at  least  tacitly  disregarded 
by  terrified  fanatics.  The  activity,  indeed,  of  the  persecution 
seems  to  have  relaxed  towards  the  close  of  this  reign ; but, 
this  was  owing  rather  to  the  emperor’s  apparent  successes, 
and  to  the  reviving  confidence  of  his  subjects,  than  to  the  re- 
morse or  compassion  of  either.5 

Of  the  feelings  and  character  of  the  imperial  philosopher 
a deeply-interesting  portraiture  is  left  us  in  the  memorials  of 
his  private  meditations.  Amidst  the  toils  and 

The  “ Medita-  * . . 

tions”  or  terrors  of  the  Marcomannic  war,  m the  camp  or 

“Commenta-  . 

ries ” of  u.  Au-  the  military  station,  on  the  banks  of  the  Danube 

rclius. 

or  the  slopes  of  the  Carpathians,  Aurelius  snatch- 
ed a few  hours  from  his  labors  to  question  his  conscience  on 
the  discharge  of  his  duties,  to  confirm  himself  in  the  precepts 
of  philosophy,  to  fortify  his  soul  against  the  troubles  of  the 
world,  and  the  dread  of  death.3 *  The  records  of  this  self-ex- 
amination extend  to  twelve  books,  each  containing  numerous 
remarks  or  maxims,  generally  unconnected,  involving  mani- 
fold repetitions,  and  presenting  thoughts  of  very  different 
value ; but  all  tending  to  establish  the  broad  principles  of 
the  Stoic  philosophy,  as  then  taught  and  understood.  Aure- 
lius had  imbibed  the  learning  of  Rusticus,  of  Sextus  the  son 

1 Euseb.  Hist.  Heel.  v.  1-5.  Sulp.  Sever,  ii.  46.  St.  Jerome,  Catal.  Script. 
c.  35.  Ruinart,  Ada  Martyrum  sincera. 

1 That  such  was  the  early  Christian  tradition  appears  from  Tertullian’a 
statement,  that  Aurelius  checked  the  persecution  of  the  Christians  after  the 
success  of  their  prayers  against  the  Quadi,  and  from  a letter  ascribed  to  him 
* also  favourable  to  them,  which  is  appended  to  the  Apology  of  Justin.  We 
may  fairly  credit  the  tradition,  while  we  question  the  authenticity  of  the  facts 
on  which  it  pretends  to  rest. 

s It  was  with  a bitter  sigh,  no  doubt,  that  Aurelius  constrained  himself  to 

believe  and  affirm  that  no  state  of  life  is  so  favourable  for  philosophy  aa 

empire.  Comment,  xi.  T. : nag  ivapyig  Trpoon'nTTei  rd  pi)  elvai  aM ryv  (3iov 
vn69eaiv  eig  ~b  (piXooofyelv  ovrug  EiriTydeiov,  ug  ravrrjv  ev  ft  vvv  o)v  rvyxaveig. 


A.U.  933.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


491 


of  Plutarch,  and  of  Apollonius,  of  whom  we  have  no  special 
knowledge ; hut  of  the  sage  Epictetus,  whom  he  most  studied 
and  admired,  some  remains  have  been  collected  by  which  his 
own  position  among  the  best  and  wisest  of  the  ancients  is  es- 
tablished, and  which  disclose  the  true  basis  of  the  imperial 
philosophy.  The  point  of  interest  in  these  works  is  the  place 
they  hold  between  the  teaching  of  the  earlier  philosophers 
and  that  of  the  revivalists  of  the  third  century.  The  time 
had  come  for  a strong  reaction  towards  positive 

° # Reaction  in  fa- 

belief.  The  Heathen  mvthologv  had  drawn  with  vour  of  posV- 

* o •/  tive  belief 

it  in  its  fall  the  principles  even  of  natural  re- 
ligion. But  this  decline  had  reached  its  limits.  In  default 
of  a better  system,  mythology  itself  might  again  rear  its 
head.  We  have  already  noticed  symptoms,  faint  and  tran- 
sient perhaps,  of  such  an  impending  restoration.  Even  had 
the  revelation  of  Christianity  not  been  made,  the  Nemesis  of 
unbelief  would  doubtless  have  raised  some  objects  on  the 
surface  of  the  whelming  waters,  were  they  but  straws,  to 
clutch  at ; and  the  abortive  efforts  of  Augustus  and  Domitian 
towards  a ritualistic  revival,  show  the  direction  in  which  the 
tide  of  opinion  or  sentiment  was  setting.  But,  already  in  the 
second  century,  the  positive  teaching  of  the  Christians  had 
reanimated  religious  speculation  beyond  its  immediate  circle, 
and  we  may  trace  in  Epictetus  and  his  imperial  admirer  the 
effects  of  a moral  movement  which  it  will  not  be  unjust  to 
ascribe,  at  least  in  part,  to  the  influence  of  St.  Paul  and  his 
Master.  Both  Epictetus  and  Aurelius  recognise  fully  the 
personal  existence  of  Deity:  neither  the  concrete  divinities 
of  Heathen  legend,  on  the  one  hand,  nor  any  single  and  infi- 
nite existence  on  the  other,  but  rather  a multitude  of  abstract 
essences,  the  nature  and  distinctions  of  whicli  are  wholly  be- 
yond the  scope  of  human  definition.1  This  cordial  belief  in* 
God  as  a moral  Intelligence,  is  a step  decidedly  in  advance 

1 Thus  Comment,  iii.  13. : ov  yap  avdpinuvdv  ri  avev  ttjc  ettIto.  8eia  cvva* 
iroipopag  ev  izpa^eig.  v.  7.  on  the  duty  of  simple  prayer  to  the  gods.  vi.  10. ; 
eefto,  Kai  evaradij,  Kal  dap'pu  Tip  dcoiKovvrr  i.  e.  providence,  vi.  23.:  £0 
anaaL  6eovg  e7rucaXov.  vi.  29. : aliov  Oeovc. 


492 


HISTORY  OP  THE  ROMANS 


[A.  D.  ISO. 


of  Seneca,  and  amounts,  indeed,  almost  to  a negation  of  the 
fundamental  article  of  the  older  Porch,  the  preeminence  of  a 
blind  and  soulless  Fate.  There  is  some  advance,  indeed,  in 
Aurelius  beyond  Epictetus ; the  pupil  is  wiser  than  his  mas- 
ter, and  seems  to  arrive  at  a genuine  conviction  of  a moral 
Providence.  Nevertheless,  on  one  important  point,  both  the 
one  and  the  other  have  fallen  behind  Seneca.  Their  hold  of 
the  doctrine  of  a future  life  appears  even  fainter  than  his. 
Epictetus,  indeed,  hardly  ventures  to  regard  it  at  all ; Aurelius, 
more  hopeful,  more  loving,  more  ardent,  seems  to  cherish  the 
fond  aspiration,  though  he  dares  not  assert  it  as  a dogma.1 
But  for  this  apparent  falling-off  a sufficient  reason  may  be 
assigned.  The  later  Stoics  had  attained  a clearer  idea  of  the 
personality  of  God,  with  a higher  conception  of  His  great- 
ness and  purity.  They  could  not  rest  in  the  pantheism  of  an 
earlier  age  ; immortality  in  their  view,  must  be  personal  and 
individual,  if  it  exist  at  all.  But  the  temper  of  the  age,  as 
of  every  age  of  declining  civilization,  was  deeply  infected 
with  the  principles  of  materialism ; it  required  faith  in  the 
specific  dogma  of  the  Christian  Resurrection  to  allay  its  fe- 
verish distrust  in  a future  state  of  being.  In  the  next  centu- 
ry, the  mellow  Stoicism  of  these  amiable  enthusiasts  was  sup- 
planted, in  turn,  by  the  New  Platonism,  which  advanced 
from  the  faint  apprehension  of  a personal  deity  to  a grasp  of 
his  attributes  and  nature ; which  embraced  a distinct  belief 
in  the  emanation  of  the  soul  from  him  and  yearned  for  re- 
union with  him.  The  errors  of  the  Alexandrian  School,  fan- 
tastic as  they  were,  served  to  prepare  mankind  for  the  recep- 
tion of  the  Gospel.  Thus  it  was  that  Philosophy  and  Re- 
ligion at  last  united  on  the  solid  ground  of  an  intelligent 
faith  in  God.  On  this  ground  was  raised  the  structure  of  the 
* Athanasian  theology.  The  clouds  and  fogbanks  of  Plotinus 
and  Porphyry,  of  Julian  and  Libanius,  were  replaced  by  the 
enduring  fabric  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Christian  Trinity. 

Few  books  leave  a profounder  impression  of  melancholy 


1 Comp.  Comment,  iv,  32.,  v.  13.,  vL  15.  28.,  viii.  58.,  x.  28. 


A.  U.  933.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


403 


than  the  Commentaries  of  the  good  Aurelius.  With  our 
knowledge  of  the  circumstances  under  which  Melancholy 
they  were  compiled,  the  pangs  of  society  around  Mediations’* 
him,  the  vexations  he  personally  suffered,  and 
the  lack  of  spiritual  hope  to  which  his  own  doc-  rellus- 
trines  condemned  him,  it  is  sad  rather  than  cheering  to  note 
the  stern  self-repression  which  forbids,  throughout  these  pri- 
vate meditations,  the  utterance  of  a single  complaint,  the 
heaving  of  a single  sigh.  One  strong  burst  of  natural  feeling 
would  be  a relief  to  the  reader,  as  it  would  have  been  doubt- 
less to  the  writer  himself.  One  passionate  reference  to  the 
troubles  of  the  empire,  and  the  sufferings  of  the  people,  or  to 
his  oAvn  endurance,  with  its  transient  gleams  of  success  and 
hopes  of  triumph,  would  have  imparted  a more  general  in- 
terest to  reflections  which  now  address  themselves  only 
here  and  there  to  a few  abstract  reasonersd  But  no ! the 
imperial  theorist  will  live  and  die  a martyr  to  his  theory. 
The  Christians  in  the  arena  of  Lugdunum  suffered,  perhaps, 
no  greater  torments.  Nor  was  the  temper  of  Aurelius  natu- 
rally hard  and  unbending.  It  was,  on  the  contrary,  almost 
feminine  in  its  softness.  He  imbibed  his  religious  feelings 
from  his  mother,  his  views  of  morals  and  philosophy  from  his 
teachers ; he  was  like  wax  in  the  hands  of  those  he  loved, 
and  he  loved  all  who  showed  love  towards  him,  and  some 
even  who  should  have  loved  him,  but  did  not.1 2  In  his  pub- 
lic career  he  betrayed  a little  weakness  ; in  his  domestic  re- 
lations his  infirmity  was  still  more  conspicuous.  Even  his  med- 
itations, with  their  anxious  and  importunate  scruples,  seem  to 
betray  some  want  of  decision,  some  littleness  of  view  and  pur- 
pose. We  must  smile  at  the  fervour  with  which  the  wisest 

1 Tlie  “ Commentaries  ” abound,  however,  in  noble  reflections  on  the  dus 
Ses  of  the  ruler  towards  his  people.  Comp.  vi.  29. : pf/  airoKaioap&dijc,  u.r] 
fiatpys.  vii.  36. : [SaoiP-iKov,  eJi  pev  7 vparrsiv,  icanug  8e  anovsiv.  vi.  64. : to  up 
apfjVEi  pt]  ov/i<pEpov,  ovds  Tij  peXiaoij  avppepei. 

2 M.  Anton.  Comment,  i.  3. : irapa  rijs  pr/Tpog  to  6eocre[3ic.  His  special  ob- 
ligations to  each  of  his  teachers,  Diognetus,  Rusticus,  Sextus  of  Chaeronea, 
Apollonius,  &c.,  are  acknowledged  in  turn. 


194 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMANS 


[&.  D.  180. 


of  princes  exhorts  himself  to  rise  betimes  in  the  morning.1 
To  fix  deeply  in  the  mind  the  conviction  of  the  vanity  of 
earthly  things,  is  a hard  lesson  for  all : it  was  hard  even  for 
the  slave  Epictetus,  harder,  surely,  for  the  emperor  Aurelius. 
It  is  hard  for  a Christian,  much  harder  for  a Pagan  ; hard  for 
those  who  look  for  substantial  glories  hereafter ; hardest  of 
all  for  such  as  have  no  hope  beyond  the  grave,  or,  if  they 
dare  to  cherish  their  yearning  in  secret,  are  forbidden  by 
their  theories  to  give  it  utterance.  Nevertheless,  the  con- 
stant recurrence  of  this  theme  in  the  work  before  us,  and  the 
variety  of  argument  and  illustration  with  which  it  is  en- 
forced, disclose  a weakness  which  cannot  be  wholly  overlook- 
ed.2 He  who  would  exact  from  himself  and  us  so  high  a 
standard  of  purity  and  self-renunciation,  while  he  limits  us 
so  strictly  to  the  resources  of  our  own  strength  and  virtue, 
discarding  all  the  aid  of  a higher  power,  which  even  the 
Heathen  passionately  demanded,  should  have  been  himself 
stronger,  firmer,  and  more  self-supporting. 

Yet  once  more,  in  justice  to  this  paragon  of  Heathen  ex- 
cellence, let  its  remember  that  Aurelius  represents  the  decrep- 
Generai  hope-  itude  of  his  era.  He  is  hopeless  because  the  age 
cietyat this°"  Hopeless.  He  cannot  rise  beyond  the  sphere 
era-  of  ideas  around  him.  The  heathen  world  looked 

for  no  renovation  of  a society  which  was  visibly  perishing 
before  its  face.  The  idea  of  constant  advance  of  mankind 
towards  perfection  had  never  formed  an  element  in  its  aspi- 
rations ; and  now,  when  the  popular  notion  of  its  degenera- 
tion was  actually  realized,  it  accepted  its  apparent  destiny 
without  a murmur.  Even  the  Christians  could  with  difficulty 
surmount  these  desponding  anticipations.  To  them,  also,  the 
decline  of  society  was  fully  manifest ; nor  did  they  regard 
the  diffusion  of  religious  truth  as  a means  of  cure  and  resto- 
ration. They  believed  that  the  Deity  would  take  up  His 
abode  in  the  soul  of  the  earnest  Christian;  they  were  con- 


1 M.  Anton.  Comment  v.  1. : dpdpov  brav  6vc6hvuq  kgeye'ipij,  irp6xeio(n 
Jcrru,  8rj  ETTt  avdp&KOV  epyov  kye'tpojuac. 

s Comment,  iii.  5.,  iv.  3.  32.  38.,  v.  33.,  vi.  13.  15.  34.,  x.  28. 


A.  U.  933.] 


UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


495 


vinced  of  the  power  of  attaining  personally  the  closest  union 
with  the  Spirit  of  Gocl ; they  gloried  in  the  assurance  of  a 
future  exaltation  to  the  mansion  of  their  Father  in  heaven, 
through  the  strength  which  He  alone  could  furnish,  or  the 
change  which  He  alone  could  work  in  them.  And  this  as- 
surance, warmly  embraced,  might  render  them  cheerful  and 
even  triumphant  amidst  the  public  calamities,  and  in  their 
own  pains  and  martyrdoms.  But  they  expected  no  general 
revival  of  society  through  the  purer  morality  of  the  Gospel ; 
no  fructifying  of  the  blessed  seed  in  the  bosom  of  an  effete 
civilization.  For  such  a progress  and  result  no  time,  as  they 
anticipated,  would  be  allowed,  for  the  end  of  the  world  ap- 
peared to  be  at  hand ; the  outward  frame  of  law  and  order 
was  only  upheld,  in  their  view,  by  the  continued  existence 
of  the  empire ; stricken  and  shaken  as  that  framework  was, 
it  could  not  long  endure,  and  on  its  fall  would  follow  the 
dissolution  of  the  divine  creation,  the  conflagration  of  the 
universe,  the  end  of  all  things.  To  Justin  and  Tertullian,  to 
Origen  and  Arnobius,  a revelation  of  the  impending  estab- 
lishment of  Christianity  would  have  seemed  as  strange  and 
incredible  as  to  Aurelius  himself. 

In  my  first  chapter  I indicated  this  momentous  revolution 
as  the  period  to  which  I purposed  to  conduct  my  history  of 
the  Romans  under  the  Empire.  I had  hoped  to 

. . , . „ Conclusion. 

entwine  with  my  relation  oi  events,  and  my  re- 
view of  literature  and  manners,  an  account  of  the  change  of 
opinion  by  which  a positive  belief  in  religious  dogmas  was 
evolved  from  the  chaos  of  doubt,  or  rose  upon  the  ruins  of 
baffled  incredulity ; to  trace  the  progress  of  this  moral  trans 
formation  from  the  day  when  the  High  Priest  of  Jupiter,  the 
Head  of  the  Roman  hierarchy,  the  chief  interpreter  of  divine 
things  to  the  Pagan  conscience,  declared  before  the  assembled 
senators  that  immortality  was  a dream,  and  future  Retribu- 
tion a fable,  to  that  when  the  Emperor,  the  Chief  of  the 
State,  the  Head  of  the  newly  established  Church  of  the 
Christians,  presided  over  a general  council  of  bishops,  and 


496 


HISTORY  OF  THE  ROMAHS. 


[A.  D.  180. 


affirmed  at  its  bidding  the  transcendent  mystery  of  a Triune 
Deity.  But  I have  learnt  by  a trial  of  many  years  to  dis- 
trust my  qualifications  for  so  grave  a task.  And  other  cares 
impede  me,  other  duties  warn  me  to  desist.  I have  now 
reached  the  point  at  which  the  narrative  of  my  great  prede- 
cessor Gibbon  commences,  and  much  as  I regret  that  the 
crisis  should  be  unfolded  to  the  English  reader  by  one  who, 
unhappy  in  his  school  and  in  his  masters,  in  his  moral  views 
and  spiritual  training,  approached  it,  with  all  his  mighty 
powers,  under  a cloud  of  ignoble  prejudices,  I forbear  myself 
from  entering  the  lists  in  which  he  has  long  stalked  alone 
and  unchallenged.  The  work  I now  offer  as  completed,  em- 
braces what  may  be  loosely  designated  the  constitutional 
period  of  the  Roman  monarchy,  extending  from  the  graceful 
primacy  of  Pompeius  to  the  barbarian  despotism  of  the  son 
of  Aurelius.  That  it  should  be  permanently  accepted  as  the 
English  History  of  the  Upper  Empire,  is  more  than  I venture 
to  anticipate ; but  I shall  not  regret  its  being  in  due  season 
supplanted,  if  I lead  a successor  of  firmer  grasp  and  wider 
vision  to  sift  our  records  in  a critical  and  independent  spirit. 


INDEX 


TO  THE 

HISTORY  OF  TIIE  ROMANS  UNDER  THE  EMPIRE. 


ABGARUS,  king;  of  Osrboene,  his  treach- 
erous counsel  to  Crassus,  i.  422.  Es- 
capes to  the  Parthian  camp,  423. 

Abgarus,  king  of  Edessa,  submits  to  Trajan, 
vii.  304. 

Abilene,  ethnarchy  of,  v.  269. 

Accius,  his  plays,  iii.  73. 

Acco,  Ca?sar's  execution  of,  ii.  1 2. 

Acerronia,  slain  by  mistake  for  Agrippina, 
vi.  101. 

Achaia,  extent  of  the  Roman  Province  of, 
i.  34.  The  government  of,  assigned  by  P. 
Clodius  to  Pi  so,  305.  Under  Appius  Clau- 
dius, ii.  217.  Occupied  by  Caesar,  218. 
Greece  proper  and  the  islands,  not  made 
a province  before  the  time  of  Julius  Caesar, 
iv.  119.  Its  limits  obscurely  defined  by 
Strabo,  119.  Consigned  by  Augustus  to 
the  senate,  119.  Its  freedom  proclaimed 
by  Nero,  vi.  270.  Again  reduced  to  a 
province  by  Vespasian,  vii.  23. 

Achillas,  minister  of  Ptoleimeus  XII.,  in- 
vites Pompeius  to  Alexandria,  ii.  244.  Car- 
ries Pompeius  ashore,  245.  Attacks  Caesar, 
253.  Assassinated  by  Ganymedes,  260. 
Acilius  Glabrio,  ex-consul,  condemned  for 
fighting  in  the  amphitheatre,  vii.  125. 
Exiled  by  Domitian  for  Judaism  or  Chris- 
tianity, 126. 

Acratus,  Nero’s  agent  for  plundering  Greece 
and  Asia  of  their  works  of  art,  vi.  142. 
Acta  diurna,  or  public  journals,  iv.  330.  Bur- 
lesqued in  the  Satiricon  of  Petronius,  331. 
Acte,  Nero's  mistress,  vi.  69,  96.  Warns 
him  against  Agrippina,  98.  Assists  at  his 
obsequies,  289." 

Actian  games,  foundation  of  the,  iii.  258. 
Actium,  the,  or  temple  of  Apollo,  iii.  248. 
Position  of  Antonins  at,  243.  The  battle 
of  Actium,  252.  Results  produced  by  this 
battle,  2b4.  Date  of  the  battle,  257.  Foun- 
dation of  the  city  of  Nicopolis  at  Actium, 
257. 

Adcantuannus,  king  of  the  Sotiates,  submits 
to  P.  Clodius,  i.  296. 

Ad  Fines,  or  Avigliana,  the  boundary  of 
Italy  at,  iv.  88. 

Addon,  governor  of  Artagira,  treacherously 
wounds  Caius  Ciesar,  iv.  218. 

Adminius,  king  of  the  Trinobantes,  solicits 


Caius  Csesar  for  a share  of  the  kingdom 
of  Cunobelinus,  vi.  19.  Detained  at  Rome, 
v.  355. 

Adrumetum  held  by  Considius  for  the  re- 
publicans, ii.  290.  Sum  exacted  by  Caesar 
from  the  citizens,  304. 

Aduatuci,  their  city  taken  by  the  Cimbri 
and  Teutones,  i.  202.-  Allies  of  the  Nervii, 
272.  Reduced  by  Csesar,  279-281.  At- 
tack Q.  Cicero's  camp,  394.  Their  head- 
quarters occupied  by  Ca-sar,  and  attacked 
by  the  Germans,  400-403. 

Adultery,  ancient  Roman  punishment  for, 
v.  154.  Disgraceful  method  of  obtaining 
impunity,  lo4, 155.  Tiberius's  edict,  clos- 
ing this  means  of  retreat,  155.  The  laws 
of  adultery  enforced  by  Domitian,  vii. 
106. 

YEdiles,  the,  under  the  empire,  iii.  401. 

.Edui,  honoured  by  the  Romans  with  the 
title  of  brothers,  i.  197  note , 214.  Their 
ascendency  in  Gaul,  233.  Threatened  by 
the  Sequani  and  Arverni,  233.  Defeated 
by  the  Sequani  and  Suevi,  234.  Support- 
ed by  Rome,  237.  The  Helvetii  march 
through  their  territory,  247,  248.  Their 
friendship  with  the  Boii,  253 ; ii.  15.  Re- 
sume their  ascendency,  i.  255.  Their 
fidelity  to  Rome,  397,  ii.  11.  Their  divi- 
sions and  vacillation,  19.  Massacre  the 
Roman  settlers,  are  reduced,  and  pardon- 
ed, 21.  Revolt  again,  24-26.  Defeated  by 
Labienus,  26.  Ciesar’s  leniency  to  them, 
34.  Revolt  under  Julius  Sacrovir,  v.  168. 
Suppressed  by  Silius,  168,  169. 

-Egina,  its  condition  under  Augustus,  iv. 
357. 

iEgitna,  Ligurian  town  of,  sacked,  i.  195. 

.Elian  law  repealed,  i.  179. 

-Elia  Petina,  married  to  and  divorced  by 
Claudius,  v.  399.  Narcissus  recommends 
their  re -marriage,  437,  443. 

.Elia  Capitolina,  Jerusalem  occupied  by  th9 
Roman  colony  of,  vii.  318. 

.Elian  and  Fufian  laws  repealed  by  Clodius, 
i.  179. 

.Elius  Gallus,  his  expedition  against  the 
Arabians,  iv.  97-100. 

.Elius  Saturninus,  fiung  from  the  Tarpeian 
rock  for  a libel  on  Tiberius,  v.  138. 


108 


INDEX. 


/Erailian  Gardens  (the  residence  of  Tigelli- 
nus),  breaking  out  of  the  lire  of  Rome  in 
them  a second  time,  vi.  130. 

“yEneid”  of  Virgil,  iv.  443.  The  glorifica- 
tion of  the  Romans  and  of  Augustus,  443. 
The.  religious  idea  which  pervades  it,  443. 
Its  vindication  of  monarchy,  444.  Augus- 
tus shadowed  forth  in  yEneas,  440. 

yErarium,  the  public,  and  the  fiscus  of  the 
emperor,  iii.  425. 

^Ethiopians,  the,  invade  Egypt,  and  are  re- 
pulsed by  Petronius,  iv.  102. 

A for.  Se  e D om  i ti  u s. 

Afranius,  L.,  Pompeian,  elected  consul,  i. 
160.  Cicero’s  opinion  of  him,  161.  Wishes 
to  confer  on  Pompeius  the  legation  to 
Egypt,  329.  Ccesar’s  opinion  of  him  as  a 
general,  ii.  128.  His  civil  and  military 
capacity,  131.  His  campaign  in  Spain, 
135.  llis  camp  near  Ilerda,  137.  Checks 
Giusar,  139.  Prepares  to  retreat  from  Iler- 
da, 144.  Retreats,  and  is  closely  followed 
by  Ciesar,  145.  The  two  armies  drawn  up 
in  battle  array,  152.  Capitulates  to  Caesar, 
153.  Re-joins  Pompeius,  190.  Suspected 
by  the  Pompeians,  225.  Joins  Cato  at 
Corcyrce,  251.  His  death,  302,  303. 

Afranius  Potitus,  devotes  his  life  for  the  re- 
covery of  the  emperor  Caius,  v.  218. 

Africa,  province  of,  placed  under  the  care 
of  Tubero,  ii.  80.  Shite  of  the  province  in 
n.  c.  44, 164.  Campaign  of  Curio,  165-167. 
Assigned  to  Augustus,  iii.  138.  Held  by 
Lepidus,  173, 184.  Committed  by  Augus- 
tus to  Statili us  Taurus,  208.  Constituted 
by  Augustus  a senatorian  province,  iv.  92. 
Its  corn-trade,  wealth,  and  tranquillity,  92. 
Population  of  the  province  in  the  time  of 
Augustus,  342.  Its  state  in  a.d.  17,  v.  56. 
Exploits  of  Tacfarioas,  56.  Who  is  de- 
feated by  Furius  Camillus,  57.  Fresh  in- 
cursions of  Tacfarinas,  166.  Two  legions 
stationed  in,  142. 

Agamemnon,  a nickname  of  Pompeius,  ii. 
225. 

Agalhe,  withdrawn  from  the  supremacy  of 
Massilia,  iv.  74. 

Agendicum,  legions  stationed  by  Ca?sar  at, 
i.  405. 

Agerinus,  announces  to  Nero  Agrippina’s 
escape  from  drowning,  vi.  102. 

Agon  Capitolinas,  quinquennial  contests  in 
music,  poetry,  and  eloquence,  instituted 
by  Domitian,  vii.  133-136. 

Agrana,  in  Arabia,  taken  by  the  Romans  un- 
der yElius  Gallus,  iv.  99. 

Agrarian  laws  of  the  Gracchi,  i.  25.  Strength 
derived  by  the  state  from  these  conces- 
sions, 27.  The  agrarian  law  of  Servilius 
Eul'us,  109.  Attempts  of  Pompeius  to 
obtain  an  agrarian  law  for  his  veterans, 
160.  Caesar's  agrarian  bill,  171.  The  agra- 
rian law  of  Lucius  Antonius,  iii.  52. 

Agri  Decumates,  tithe  land,  under  Augustus, 
iv.  173.  Under  Trajan,  vii.  176. 

Agricola,  C.  Julius,  commands  the  xxth  le- 
gion in  Britain,  vii.  70.  Governs  Aqui- 
tania, 70.  Becomes  consul,  70.  Betroths 
his  daughter  to  Tacitus,  70  note  2.  His 
campaigns  in  Britain,  71.  Establishes  him- 
self on  the  Tyne  and  Solway,  72,  73.  Bat- 


tle of  the  Grampians,  73-75.  His  intend 
ed  circumnavigation  of  Britain,  77.  Re* 
called  by  Domitian,  who  is  jealous  of  him, 
77,  78.  Has  triumphal  honours,  and  re- 
tires from  public  life,  80.  Compared  with 
Corbulo,  80.  His  death  ascribed  to  Domi- 
tian, 144,  145. 

Agricola,  Calpurnius,  appointed  to  the  com- 
mand in  Britain,  vii.  454.  Attacks  the 
Caledonians,  454. 

Agrippa,  M.  Vipsanius,  his  origin  and  early 
career,  iii.  211-214.  Supports  Augustus 
from  the  first,  56.  His  destiny  predicted, 
60.  Prosecutes  Cassius  for  the  murder  of 
Caesar,  133.  At  Philippi,  213.  At  Peru- 
sia,  179.  Advances  to  confront  Antccius, 
182.  His  victories  in  Aquitania,  196. 
Constructs  the  Julian  Haven,  196,  197. 
Defeats  a Pompeian  fleet,  199.  Com- 
pletely defeats  Sextus  Pompeius,  201,  246. 
llis  icdileship,  234,  235.  Commands  a 
squadron  for  Octavius’  fleet  at  the  battle 
of  Actium.  246,  251.  Entrusted  with  the 
government  of  Rome  during  the  absence 
of  Octavius,  259.  A “cerulean  banner” 
conferred  on  him  by  Octavius,  316.  Said 
to  have  urged  Augustus  to  resign  his 
power,  324,  iv.  128.  Governs  Rome  during 
the  retirement  of  Augustus,  iii.  368.  Quells 
a revolt  in  Aquitania.  iv.  70.  Consul  and 
censor  with  Octavius,  iii.  328,  329.  Com- 
pletely reduces  Spain,  iv.  67,  68.  Marries 
Marcella,  iii.  331,  iv.  127.  Governor  of 
Rome,  iii.  337.  His  Pantheon,  339.  The 
presumptive  successor  to  Augustus,  339, 
340.  llis  military  roads  in  Gaul,  iv. 
80.  Less  popular  than  Marcell  us,  128. 
Sent  by  Augustus  on  a mission  to  the 
East,  129,  162.  Marries  Julia,  134.  llis 
uneasy  relations  with  Augustus,  136.  His 
children  by  Julia,  136.  Represses  an 
outbreak  of  the  Cantabrians,  137.  Tri- 
bune, 140.  His  sons  adopted  by  Augustus, 
155.  Visited  in  Syria  by  Herod,  whe 
leads  him  through  Judea,  162.  Settles 
the  affairs  of  the  kingdom  of  the  Bos- 
phorus, 163.  Favors  granted  by  him  to 
the  Jews,  164.  His  harsh  treatment  of 
the  Ilienses,  164.  Returns  to  Rome,  and 
declines  a triumph,  165.  His  last  cam- 
paign in  Pannonia,  165.  His  death  and 
character,  166,  167.  llis  family,  169. 
Completion  of  the  hall  of  Agrippa,  192. 
His  “ Orbis  Pictus,”  or  map  of  the  world, 
iii.  422 ; iv.  323.  His  baths  at  Rome,  vii. 

35. 

Agrippa  Postumus,  youngest  child  of  M 
Agrippa  and  Julia,  his  birth,  iv.  169. 
Adopted  into  the  Julian  family  by  Au- 
gustus, 220.  His  mental  and  bodily  de- 
fects, 252.  Banished  to  Planasia,  253. 
Reported  visit  of  Augustus  to  him,  281, 
282.  Put  to  death  on  the  accession  of  Ti- 
berius, v.  11. 

Agrippa,  Clemens  the  false,  v.  87,  88. 

Agrippa,  son  of  Berenice.  See  Herod 
Agrippa. 

Agrippina,  daughter  of  Agrippa  and  Julia, 
married  to  Germanicus,  iv.  256,  279;  v 
23.  Her  masculine  spirit^  v.  22,  34,  178. 
Awakens  Tiberius’s  jealousy  by  her  ad 


INDEX. 


499 


dress  to  the  legionaries,  34,  36.  Her  nu- 
merous family,  25.  Accompanies  Ger- 
manicus  to  the  East,  61.  Plancina’s  ri- 
valry. 61.  Dying  charge  of  Germanicus 
to  her,  6T.  Comes  to  ltome  with  his  re- 
mains, 73.  Praises  and  acclamations  lav- 
ished on  her  and  her  children  by  the  peo- 
ple, 76.  Enmity  of  Tiberius  and  Scjanus 
to  her,  179.  Her  ruin  plotted  by  Sejanus, 
190.  Quarrel  with  Tiberius,  191  192. 
Suspicions  against  her  instilled  by  Seja- 
nus, 209.  Tiber] us  complains  of  her  to 
the  senate,  214.  She  is  banished  to  Pan- 
dateria,  215,  216.  Starves  herself,  237. 
Her  remains  excluded  from  the  mauso- 
_eum  of  the  Caesars,  but  subsequently 
honorably  interred  by  Caius,  238.  • 

Agrippina,  daughter  of  Germanicus  and 
Agrippina,  married  (1)  to  Crispins  Pas- 
sienus,  vi.  56;  (2)  to  L.  Domitius,  by 
whom  she  has  Nero,  v.  250;  vi.  55.  Ex- 
iled by  Caius,  v.  351.  Recalled  by  Clau- 
dius, 363,  370,  407.  Her  son  Lucius  Do- 
mitius  (Nero),  422.  Her  feud  with  Mes- 
salina,  423.  In  league  with  the  freedmen 
of  Claudius  against  Messalina,  424,  430, 

437.  Her  memoirs,  423,  424.  Her  am- 
bition and  artifices,  437.  Betroths  Oc- 
tavia  to  Nero,  and  gains  over  Vitellius, 

438,  442.  Her  marriage  with  Claudius, 
440.  Recalls  Seneca  from  exile,  442. 
Causes  the  death  of  Lollia,  and  the  exile 
of  Calpurnia,  443.  Pallas,  her  paramour, 
443.  Courts  the  army,  and  founds  Colonia 
Agrippinensis,  445.  Affects  to  be  a part- 
ner in  the  empire,  446.  Her  increasing 
influence,  448,  451.  Procures  the  con- 
demnation of  Statilius  Taurus,  451.  Her 
further  triumphs,  453.  Employs  delators 
against  Domitia  Lepida,  who  is  executed, 
455.  Poisons  Claudius,  456.  Her  meas- 
ures for  the  succession  of  Nero,  458.  Pres- 
ent at  the  exhibition  of  the  British  cap- 
tives at  Rome,  37.  Her  education  of  Nero, 
vi.  56.  Appoints  Burrhus  and  Seneca  his 
tutors,  84.  Contests  with  the  senate  for 
influence  over  her  son,  63,  64.  Her  arro- 
gance, 67.  Seneca  and  Burrhus  combine 
against  her,  6S.  She  quarrels  with  Acte, 
69.  Disgrace  of  Pallas,  and  alarm  and 
menaces  of  Agrippina,  72.  Her  dissension 
with  Nero,  and  spirited  defence  of  herself, 
78-81.  The  charges  against  her  declared 
unfounded,  81.  Detested  by  the  Romans, 
98.  Intrigues  of  Poppaea  against  her,  99. 
Retires  from  court,  100.  Failure  of  an 
attempt  to  destroy  her,  101.  Her  murder 
and  burial,  102-104. 

Akiba,  the  rabbi,  his  typical  character,  vii. 
315.  Nominates  Barcochebas  to  the  chief- 
ship  of  the  Jewish  people,  317.  His  cruel 
death,  318. 

Alauda,  Caesar’s  Gaulish  legion  so  named, 
ii.  70. 

Alba,  house  of  Pompeius  at,  i.  183;  ii.  79. 
Sides  with  Augustus,  iii.  93. 

Albani,  the,  submit  to  Trajan,  vii.  303. 

Albici,  the,  aid  the  Massilians  against  the 
Caesarians,  ii.  143, 157. 

Albinus,  his  attempt  on  Spain,  and  death, 
vi.  840. 


Albucilla,  wife  of  Satrius,  executed  for  ma- 
jestas,  v.  243. 

Alcantara,  Trajan’s  bridge  at,  vii.  253. 

Alesia,  its  site,  siege,  and  capture  by  Caesar, 
ii.  30-32. 

Alexander  the  Great,  his  statue  at  Gades,  i. 
102.  Answer  of  the  Gaulish  chieftains  to 
him,  228.  His  tomb  at  Alexandria  visited 
by  Caesar,  ii.  257.  And  by  Augustus,  iii. 
2S0.  Germanicus  compared  to  him,  v.  69. 

Alexanoer,  son  of  Antonius  and  Cleopatra. 
+he  kingdoms  of  Armenia,  Parthia,  and 
Media  assigned  by  Antonius  to,  iii.  226. 
Betrothed  to  Jotape,  daughter  of  the  king 
of  Media,  237. 

Alexander  Tiberius,  prefect  of  Egypt,  de- 
clares for  Vespasian,  vi.  349.  The  second 
procurator  in  Judea,  421. 

Alexander,  son  of  Aristobulus.  carried  by 
Pompeius  to  Rome,  iii.  299.  Put  to 
death,  301. 

Alexander,  son  of  Herod  the  Great,  restored 
to  liberty,  iv.  163.  Put  to  death  by  hid 
father,  216. 

Alexander,  Julius,  takes  part  in  the  reduc- 
tion of  Seleucia,  vii.  306.  307. 

Alexander  and  the  Alexandrians  give  law 
to  Egypt,  i.  350.  The  Alexandrians  con- 
temptible as  a soldiery,  351.  Conflict  be- 
tween them  and  Caesar’s  soldiers,  ii.  255. 
Then-  character,  258.  Rise  against  Caesar, 
258.  “Who  burns  the  Egyptian  fleet  and, 
accidentally,  part  of  the  library,  259.  Sub- 
mission of  the  Alexandrians  to  Caasar,  263. 
Extravagant  conduct  of  Antonius  at  Alex 
andria,  iii.  225.  The  city  described,  229- 
232.  Entered  by  Octavius,  226.  A Roman 
legion  quartered  in,  2S0.  Deprived  of  its 
municipal  privileges  by  Augustus,  280. 
Jews  a third  part  of  the  population,  285. 
Corn-fleets  of  Alexandria,  iv.  315.  The 
Jews  at  Alexandria  insulted  by  the  na- 
tives, v.  310.  And  by  the  Roman  gov- 
ernor Avilius  Flaccus,  310.  Consequent 
riot  and  disgrace  of  Flaccus,  311.  Dis- 
turbances caused  by  a remnant  of  the 
Zealots  from  Jerusalem,  vii.  285.  The 
city  visited  by  Hadrian,  353.  Character 
of  its  university,  371.  Hadrian's  account 
of  the  people,  372.  Their  ingratitude  to 
him,  37o,  376.  Dion  Chrysostom's  “Ora- 
tion on  the  Alexandrians,”  376. 

Aliens,  Roman,  comprehension  of,  in  the 
state,  i.  23. 

Aliso,  a Roman  station  near  the  Rhine, 
erected  by  Drusus,  iv.  182.  Varus  fails  to 
reach  it,  274.  Abandoned  by  its  garrison, 
274.  Its  position,  275  note  *. 

Alledius,  proposes  to  legalize  the  marriage 
of  uncle  and  niece,  v.  440. 

Allia,  a name  of  evil  omen,  i.  1S9. 

Allobroges,  intercourse  of  the  Catilinariau 
conspirators  with  the,  i.  119.  Defeated  by 
Fabius,  196.  Absorbed  into  the  Province, 
196.  Send  envoys  to  Rome  and  reveal 
Catilina’s  offers  to  Cicero,  209,  210.  Re- 
sist and  are  subdued.  210.  Their  terri- 
tory, 214.  Geneva  their  frontier-town, 
241.  The  Helvetii  determine  to  force 
their  way  through  the  territory  of  the 
Allobroges,  241.  Defeated  by  Pomptinus, 


500 


INDEX 


241.  Compelled  by  Ctesar  to  furnish  pro- 
visions to  the  Helvctii,  253.  Their  en- 
deavors to  prevent  Caesar  from  crossing 
the  Rhone,  ii.  27. 

Almo,  the  river,  the  “mother  of  the  gods” 
of  the  Gauls,  vi,  84. 

Alpinulus,  Julius,  the  Helvetian  chief,  put 
to  death  by  Valens,  vi.  323. 

Alps,  operations  of  Augustus  for  securing 
the  passes  of  the,  iv.  86.  The  Pennine 
Alps,  i.  287, 

Ambiani,  a Belgian  tribe,  joins  the  confed- 
eracy against  the  Romans,  i.  267.  Submit 
to  Ciesar,  271. 

Ambiliati,  the,  join  a maritime  confederacy 
against  Caesar,  i.  290. 

Ambiorix,  chief  of  the  Eburones,  i.  392.  At- 
tacks the  Romans,  392.  His  courage  and 
craft,  392.  Destroys  two  legions,  393. 
Surrounds  Q.  Cicero’s  camp,  394.  His  de- 
feat and  escape,  399.  Caesar  issues  forth 
in  quest  of  him  400.  Eludes  Caesar,  404. 
Leads  the  remnant  of  the  Eburones,  ii.  36. 

Ambrones,  the,  destroyed  by  Marius,  i.  204. 

Amphipolis,  camp  of  the  triumvirs  at,  iii. 
164. 

Amphitheatre,  the,  of  the  Romans.  See 
Circus. 

Am  pi  us,  prevented  by  Caesar  from  robbing 
the  temple  of  Ephesus,  ii.  253. 

Amyntas,  minister  and  general  of  Deiota- 
rus,  receives  the  throne  of  Pisidia  from 
Antonius,  iii.  190.  Abandons  Antonius 
and  joins  the  Ciesarians,  249.  Deserts  the 
senatorian  party  for  Antonius,  iv.  110. 
Confirmed  in  his  kingdom  by  Augustus, 
110. 

Ananas,  or  Annas,  high  priest  of  Jerusalem, 
a chief  of  the  Herodians,  vi.  429.  Insulted 
and  menaced  by  the  Zealots,  448.  Mur- 
dered by  them,  449. 

Ancalitse,  a British  tribe,  submit  to  Caesar, 
i.  389. 

Ancestors,  wax  effigies  of,  of  distinguished 
Romans,  iv.  19. 

Ancona,  Trajan’s  arch  at,  vii.  206. 

Ancyra,  monument  of  Augustus  at,  iv.  284, 

Audi,  a tribe  of  Gauls,  compelled  to  submit 
to  the  Romans,  i.  282,  289.  Revolt  of, 
suppressed,  v.  168. 

Anirlesey,  rout  of  the  Druids  by  Suetonius 
Paullinus  in,  vi.  42. 

Anicius  Cerealis,  proposes  a temple  to  Nero, 
vi.  152.  Put  to  death  by  him,  162. 

Anicetus,  Nero's  commander  of  the  fleet  at 
ina,  vi.  101,  102.  Pretends  an  intrigue 
lisenum,  undertakes  the  murder  of  Agrip- 
with  Octavia,  123. 

Annalis,  praetor,  his  proscription  and  death, 
iii.  144. 

Annalis  lex,  iii.  130. 

Annia,  Cinua’s  widow,  divorced  by  Piso,  i.  93. 

Ann  yean  family,  raised  to  the  consulate  by 
the  Caesars,  vi.  254  note.' 

Anteius,  suspected  by  Nero,  as  a friend  of 
Agrippina’s,  vi.  263. 

fcntigonus,  son  of  Aristobulus,  carried  by 
Pompeius  as  a hostage  to  Rome,  iii.  299. 
Invades  Palestine  with  the  aid  of  the  Par- 
tisans, 303.  Becomes  master  of  Jerusa- 
lem, 304.  Executed  by  Antonius  with 
unusual  atrocity,  £05. 


Antimaelius,  taken  by  Statius  as  his  model, 
vii.  229. 

Antinous,  Hadrian’s  favourite,  his  death,  viL 
375. 

Antioch,  description  of,  iv.  361.  Second  to 
Alexandria  alone  in  its  grandeur  and 
population,  362.  The  great  earthquake  at, 
vii.  299.  Hadrian's  visit  to  Antioch,  378 
"Which  disgusts  him  with  its  frivolity  and 
licentiousness,  378.  Hadrian  insulted  by 
the  citizens,  379. 

Antiochus,  king  of  Commagene,  sues  for 
permission  to  wear  the  Roman  toga,  i. 
353.  Joins  Pompeius  in  the  civil  war.  ii. 
188.  Besieged  in  Samosata  by  Ventid;.  is 
and  afterwards  Antonius,  iii.  192.  Put  to 
death,  iv.  113. 

Antiochus,  restored  by  Claudius  to  his  king 
dom  of  Commagene,  v.  379.  Supports 
Vespasian,  vi.  350. 

Antiochus  Asiaticus,  king  of  Syria,  dethron- 
ed by  Pompeius,  i.  138. 

Antiochus  Epiphanes,  his  attempts  to  Hel- 
lenize  the  Jews,  iii.  290.  His  buildings  at 
Athens,  iv.  356. 

Antipater,  the  Idumean,  appointed  by  Pom- 
peius, minister  of  Ilyrcanus,  iii.  299.  His 
ascendency  in  Palestine,  301. 

Antipater,  son  of  Herod  the  Great,  put  to 
death  by  his  father,  iv.  216. 

Antipolis  (Antibes),  besieged  by  the  Liguri- 
ans. iv.  195.  Taken  from  the  supremacy 
of  Massilia,  iv.  74. 

Antist.ia  divorced  by  Pompeius  at  Sulla’s 
command,  i.  93. 

Antistius,  proprietor  in  Spain,  i.  102. 

Antistius,  praetor,  exiled  for  lampooning 
Nero,  vi.  115,  116. 

Antistius,  T,  joins  Sextus  Pompeius,  but 
finally  abandons  him,  iii.  204. 

Antistius  Labro.  See  Labro. 

Antonia,  mother  of  Germanicus,  divulges 
the  conspiracy  of  Sejanus  against  the 
life  of  Tiberius,  v.  223.  Distinctions  con- 
ferred upon  her  by  the  emperor  Caius, 
290. 

Antonia,  daughter  of  Claudius  by  iElia  Re- 
tina, her  marriage  with  Cnaeus  Pompeius 
Magnus,  v.  399. 

Antonine  column  at  Rome,  described,  viL 
473. 

Antonine  period  of  Roman  history,  its  char- 
acter, vii.  7.  Improperly  limited  to  the 
reigns  of  Pius  and  Aurelius,  it  should 
commence  with  Vespasian  and  extend  to 
the  death  of  Alexander  Severus,  8. 

Antoninus,  T.  Aurelius,  chosen  by  Hadrian 
for  his  successor,  vii.  3S8.  Required  by 
Hadrian  to  adopt  M.  Annius  V erus  and 
L.  Verus,  388.  His  family  names,  395. 
His  surname  of  Pius,  397.  His  early 
career  and  character.  398.  Unanimous 
testimony  of  antiquity  to  his  virtues,  398, 
400.  Troubles  in  his  reign  from  the  Jews, 
Daci,  Alani,  Britons,  &c~,  400.  His  pater- 
nal government,  buildings,  and  laws,  402, 
405.  His  indulgence  to  the  Christians, 
his  mildness,  and  domestic  life,  405  408. 
Marries  his  daughter  Faustina  to  M.  Au 
relius,  396,  409.  Numerous  busts  and 
medals  of  him,  412.  His  composure  in 
death  and  last  watchword,  413.  Epoch 


INDEX. 


501 


of  Antoninus  surveyed,  413,  449.  "Wall  of 
Antoninus,  vii.  402.  The  itinerary  of  An- 
toninus, 400.  Celebrated  jurisconsults 
who  flourished  in  his  reign,  405. 

Antonius,  Caius,  becomes  consul,  in  con- 
junction with  Cicero,  i.  110. 

Antoninus,  Caracalla,  decree  of,  communi- 
cates the  Roman  franchise  to  all  subjects 
of  the  empire,  vii.  423. 

Antonius  Primus,  leads  Vespasian’s  forces 
into  Italy,  vi.  355.  Disregards  the  orders 
of  V enpasian  and  Mucianus.  35T.  Defeats 
the  Vitellians  at  Bedriacum,  357.  Per- 
mits, if  he  does  not  command,  the  sack 
and  burning  of  Cremona,  358.  Crosses 
the  Apennines  and  offers  terms  to  Vitelli- 
ns,  362.  Marches  along  the  Flaminian 
Road  to  the  gates  of  Rome,  and  storms 
the  city  and  the  Praetorian  camp,  369,  370. 
Claims  the  slaves  and  furniture  of  the 
palace,  and  sets  up  Domitian  as  Caesar, 
373.  Praetorian  insignia  conferred  on 
him,  but  he  is  checked  by  Mucianus,  374, 
377.  Coolly  treated  by  Vespasian,  382. 

Antonius  Musa  applies  the  water-cure  suc- 
cessfully in  the  case  of  Augustus,  but  un- 
successfully in  that  of  Marcellus,  iv.  131. 

Antonius,  C.,  uncle  of  the  triumvir,  im- 
peached by  Caesar,  i.  96.  Consul  with 
Cicero,  115.  Suspected  of  privity  to  Cat- 
ilina’s  designs,  116.  His  tardy  move- 
ments against  Catilina,  131. 

Antonius,  C.,  younger  brother  of  the  trium- 
vir, commands  the  C;esarian  forces  in  11- 
lyricum,  ii.  169.  Defeated  and  goes  over 
with  all  his  forces  into  the  service  of  the 
consuls,  170.  His  detachment  added  to 
the  Pompeian  forces,  1S9.  Becomes  prae- 
tor, iii.  18  note  *,  31.  Declaration  of  Oc- 
tavius made  before  him,  61.  Shut  up  in 
Apollonia  by  Brutus.  109.  Taken  by  Bru- 
tus, who  spares  his  life,  158. 

Antonius,  Julius,  second  son  of  the  trium- 
vir. married  to  Marcella,  daughter  of  Oc- 
tavia,  iii.  271  note ; iv.  136, 183  note  l.  Put 
to  death  by  Augustus  for  intriguing  with 
Julia  and  for  treason,  211.  His  name  not 
erased  from  the  Fasti,  212. 

Antonius,  Lucius,  brother  of  the  triumvir, 
tribune,  iii.  18  note'1,  31.  His  agrarian 
law,  52.  Left  by  his  brother  to  watch 
Mutina,  117.  Becomes  consul  in  b.c.  41, 
178.  Rises  against  Octavius,  178.  As- 
sumes the  surname  of  Pietas,  178.  Effects 
a combination  against  Augustus,  179.  Is 
blockaded  in  Perusia,  capitulates,  aDd  is 
6pared,  179, 180. 

Antonius,  M.,  son  of  Antonius  and  Fulvia, 
put  to  death,  iii.  271. 

Antonius,  M.,  Caesar’s  officer  in  Bel- 
gium, ii.  38.  Quaestor,  76.  Elected 
to  a seat  in  the  College  of  Augurs, 
76.  And  tribune,  78.  Flees  to  Ravenna, 
82.  Convokes  a meeting  of  the  senate, 
123.  In  charge  of  Italy,  128, 170, 180, 182. 
Refuses  to  allow  Cicero  to  leave  Italy,  171. 
Cicero’s  scurrilous  declamations  against 
him,  172.  Charged  by  Csesar  with  "tardi- 
ness, 199.  Prevents  Llbo  from  obtaining 
supplies,  200.  Crosses  the  Adriatic  with 
the  second  division.  204.  Appointed  mas- 
ter of  the  horse  to  C;jcsar,  270.  Represses 


the  intrigues  of  Dolabella,  270.  His  pri- 
vate irregularities,  279.  Purchases  Pom- 
peius’s  house  on  the  Palatine,  279.  His 
resentment  against  Caesar,  347.  Mar- 
ries the  notorious  Fulvia,  347.  Becomes 
consul,  365.  Offers  Caesar  a diadem,  371. 
Said  to  have  conspired  against  him,  374 
His  flight  after  Caesar’s  death,  iii.  7.  Ob- 
tains Caesar’s  papers  and  treasures,  and 
combines  with  Lepidus,  15.  Seizes  the 
public  treasure  and  convenes  a meeting 
of  the  senate,  18, 19.  Employs  the  people 
to  overawe  the  senate,  22.  Obtains  the 
ratification  of  Caesar’s  acts,  22-24.  His 
able  use  of  his  position,  27-32.  Enter- 
tains the  conspirator  Cassius,  30.  Reas- 
sures the  senate  of  his  moderation,  44 
Accepts  Dolabella  as  his  colleague  in  the 
consulship,  46.  His  funeral  oration  over 
Caesar,  38,  39.  Abolishes  the  dictatorship, 
47.  Puts  the  impostor  Herophilus  to 
death,  49.  Begins  to  use  the  authority  of 
Caesar’s  papers  for  his  own  ends,  50.  His 
connection  with  the  forgeries  of  Faberius, 
51.  Secures  his  personal  safety  by  means 
of  a body-guard,  52.  Obtains  a new  as- 
signment of  lands  in  Campania  to  the 
veterans,  53.  His  interview  with  Octa- 
vius, 62.  Obtains  Syria  for  Dolabella  and 
Macedonia  for  himself,  69.  His  intrigues 
to  get  the  Cisalpine  from  Decimus  Brutus, 
and  the  legions  destined  for  the  Parthian 
war,  78, 79.  Unpopular  with  the  Caesarians 
79.  His  hollow  reconciliation  with  Octa- 
vius, 79.  Obtains  from  the  people  an  ex- 
change of  provinces,  90.  Attacked  by  Cal- 
purnius  Piso  in  the  senate,  82.  Inveighs 
against  Cicero  in  the  senate,  85.  Replies 
to  Cicero’s  first  philippic,  87.  His  quar- 
rel with  Octavius,  89.  His  severities  at 
Brundisium,  S9.  Returns  to  Rome  and 
complains  of  Octavius  to  the  senate,  92. 
Abandoned  by  two  of  his  legions,  who  go 
over  to  Octavius,  92.  Prepares  to  expel 
Decimus  Brutus  from  the  Cisalpine,  90-93. 
Cicero’s  second,  third,  fourth,  and  fifth 
philippics,  94,  100,  102.  Besieges  Brutus 
in  Mutina,  101-106.  Commissioners  sent 
to  negotiate  with  him,  104.  Who  return 
with  "demands  from  him,  106.  Union  of 
the  consuls  with  Octavius  to  relieve  Deci- 
mus in  Mutina,  114.  Antonius’s  reply  to 
Cicero’s  invectives,  and  Cicero’s  rejoinder, 
115.  Engages  the  forces  of  Pansa  at  Fo- 
rum Gaiiorum,  116.  Crosses  the  Alps, 
123.  Joins  Lepidus,  125.  His  conference 
■with  Octavius  and  Lepidus,  and  formation 
of  the  second  triumvirate,  137.  Organizes 
with  Octavius  and  Lepidus  the  proscrip- 
tion, 139, 140.  Fixes  the  head  and  hands 
of  Cicero  on  the  Rostra,  147.  His  cruelty 
and  that  of  his  wife  Fulvia,  155.  Defeats 
Cassius  at  Philippi,  162-167.  Sends  the 
body  o*  Brutus  to  Servilia,  170.  Under- 
takes the  subjugation  of  the  eastern  prov- 
inces, 172.  His"  exactions  in  Asia  Minor, 
173.  His  first  meeting  with  Cleopatra: 
follows  her  to  Alexandria,  175,  176.  In- 
trigues with  Sextus  Pompeius  and  Domi- 
tius  against  Octavius,  182.  Death  of  hia 
wife  Fulvia.  182.  His  marriage  with  Oc- 
tavio, 183.  The  eastern  provinces  and  the 


502 


INDEX. 


Parthian  war  assigned  to  him,  185.  Leaves 
Home  for  the  East,  181).  Passes  the  win- 
ter in  Athens,  190.  His  extravagant  be- 
haviour there,  190.  Appears  off  Brundi- 
smm  with  three  hundred  sail,  but  forbid- 
den by  Octavius  to  lan!,  197.  Furnishes 
Octavius  with  a hundred  and  thirty  ships, 
197.  The  triumvirate  renewed  for  a sec- 
ond period  of  five  years,  197.  Leaves 
Octavia  in  Italy,  198.  His  renewed  inti- 
macy with  Cleopatra,  211,  219,  220.  His 
first  expedition  to  Parthia,  221.  En- 
ters Media  Atropatene,  221.  His  disaster- 
ous  retreat,  222.  Returns  to  Cleopatra, 
223.  Prepares  for  another  expedition 
against  the  Parthians,  223.  Men  and 
money  brought  by  his  wife  Octavia,  224. 
Antonius  refuses  to  see  her,  224.  His 
triumph  at  Alexandria,  and  extravagant 
conduct  there,  225, 229.  His  amicable  re- 
lations with  Octavius,  233.  His  final  rup- 
ture with  Octavius,  236.  Their  angry  re- 
criminations, 236.  Courts  the  alliance  of 
the  king  of  Parthia,  236.  Wmters  at 
Samos  with  Cleopatra,  238.  Receives  the 
fugitive  consuls,  and  proclaims  himself 
their  protector,  240,  241.  Divorces  Octa- 
via, 241,  243.  Deserted  by  Plancus  and 
Tit i us,  who  divulge  the  contents  of  his 
will,  241.  Indignation  of  the  Romans 
against  him,  242.  His  preparation  for 
war,  244.  His  armaments  compared  with 
those  of  Octavius,  245.  His  strong  posi- 
tion at  Actium,  247,  24S.  Prepares  to  en- 
gage the  Octavians,  248.  Defection  among 
his  officers  and  allies,  249.  Determines, 
by  Cleopatra’s  advice,  to  withdraw  to 
Egypt,  250.  His  flight  with  Cleopatra  to 
Alexandria,  255.  Surrender  of  his  army 
to  Octavius,  256.  Refused  admission  into 
Paradonium,  260.  His  despair  and  revels 
at  Alexandria,  262,  263.  The  society  of 
“ Inimitable  Livers,”  262.  Challenges  Oc- 
tavius, 264.  Mortally  wounds  himself  on 
the  false  report  of  Cleopatra’s  death,  and 
expires  in  her  arms,  265.  His  royal  obse- 
quies and  character,  274, 275.  The  “ Loves 
of  Antony  and  Cleopatra,”  275,  276.  His 
conduct  in  Palestine,  303-306. 

Antonius  Saturninus,  commander  of  the 
legions  in  Upper  Germany,  revolts  against 
Domitian,  is  routed,  and  slain,  vii.  96,  97. 

Antyllus,  eldest  son  of  M.  Antonins  and 
Fulvia,  put  to  death,  iii.  271. 

Appamea,  city  of,  taken  by  C.  Bassus,  ii. 
318.  Its  condition  in  the  time  of  Augus- 
tus, iv.  360.  Injured  by  an  earthquake,  v. 
453.  Its  cause  pleaded  by  young  Nero,  453. 

Apaturius,  a dancer,  a favourite  of  Popp<ca, 
vi.  206. 

Apicata,  wife  of  Seianus,  discloses  to  Tibe- 
rius the  story  of  the  murder  of  Drusus,  v 
231. 

Apis.,  oracle  of,  consulted  by  Germanicus,  v. 
6 r 

Apocv.^.yntosis,  “the  Pumkinification,” 
Seneca’s  satire  on  Claudius,  v.  463. 

Apollo,  worship  of,  in  Gaul,  under  the  name 
of  Belenes,  i.  223.  Temple  of,  of  Augustus, 
on  the  Palatine,  hill,  iv.  24.  Silence  of  his 
oracle  at  Delphi  ascribed  to  the  wicked- 
ness of  the  Neronian  age,  vi.  197. 


Apollodorus,  the  architect,  and  the  emperoi 
Hadrian,  story  of,  vii.  340.' 

Apol Ionia,  Caesar  at,  ii.  222,  iii.  109. 

Apollonius  of  Tyana,  a diviner  and  thauma- 
turge. vii.  1 12.  Convicted  of  machinations 
against  Domitian,  and  resides  at  Ephesus, 
148.  Assassination  of  Domitian  revealed 
to  him,  154.  The  life  or  romance  of  Apol 
lonius  by  Philostratus,  365. 

Apologists,  the  Christian  of  the  second  <cjn- 
tury,  vii.  368. 

Aponius,  commands  the  republican  insur- 
gents in  Spain,  ii.  305. 

Appian,  “The  Queen  of  Ways,”  described, 
iv.  368,369. 

Appian,  the  historian,  compared  with  Plu- 
tarch, vii.  233. 

Appius  Claudius,  brother  of  P.  Clodius, 
elected  consul,  i.  353.  His  venality  and 
rigour  as  censor,  ii.  73.  Endeavours  to 
expel  Curio  the  younger  from  the  senate, 
74.  Consults  the  oracle  at  Delphi,  217. 
Hi3  death,  218. 

Appius  Silanus,  head  of  the  Junian  house, 
destroyed  by  Messalina,  v.  408. 

Appuleius,  tribune  of  the  people,  defends 
Cicero  iii.  116.  Elected  consul,  366. 

Apqleia  lex  de  Majestate,  v.  116. 

Apuleia  Yarilia,  granddaughter  of  Octavia, 
found  guilty  of  adultery  and  banished,  v. 
129. 

Apuleius.  S.,  obtains  the  last  triumph  over 
the  Iberians,  iv.  65. 

Apulian  mountains,  character  of  the  shep- 
herds of  the,  i.  51,  note. 

Aqua  Maicia,  description  of  the,  iv.  365, 
369. 

Aquae  Sextiae  (Alx),  discovery  of  the  medi- 
cinal springs  at,  and  foundation  of  the 
Roman  city,  i.  196.  The  Teutones  de- 
feated by  Marius  near,  204. 

Aqueducts,  seven  at  Rome  in  the  reign  of 
Augustus,  iv.  365.  Appia,  369.  Crabra, 
368,  379.  Marcia,  365,  369,  vi.  250. 

Aquilius,  tribune,  supports  the  opponents  of 
Caesar,  i.  343. 

Aquilius,  how  put  to  death  by  Mithridates, 
i.  43  note. 

Aquinus,  M.,  joins  the  conspirators  in  the 
capitol,  iii.  12. 

Aquitani,  origin  of  the,  i.  213.  Their  dwell- 
ing-place, 213.  Submit  to  the  Romans. 
295,  296.  Revolt,  but  chastised  by  Agrip- 
pa,  iv.  70. 

Aquitania,  existing  monuments  of  Druidism 
in,  i.  224.  Campaign  of  P.  Crassus  in,  295. 

Arabia,  expedition  of  ^Elius  Gallus  into.  iv. 
97.  Conquests  in,  by  Cornelius  Palma, 
vii.  201.  Its  commercial  emporia  long 
attached  to  the  empire,  201. 

Arabs,  the,  chastised  by  Gabinius,  i.  350. 

Arar  (Saone)  river,  i.  246. 

Archelaus,  a competitor  for  the  hand  of 
Berenice,  queen  of  Egypt,  i.  351. 

Archelaus,  made  king  of  Cappadocia,  by 
Marcus  Antonius,  iv.  111.  His  dominioi  a 
enlarged  by  Augustus,  112.  Founds  the 
Cappadocian  Sebaste,  112.  His  death  at 
Rome,  v.  51.  His  kingdom  formed  into  a 
Roman  province,  51,  269. 

Archelaus,  son  of  Herod  the  Great,  has  the 
kingdom  of  Judea,  with  Samaria  and  Idu- 


INDEX. 


503 


inea,  y.  209.  Discontented  with  his  por- 
tion, 269.  His  disgrace  and  banishment, 
270. 

Architecture,  domestic,  of  the  Romans,  iv. 
390.  Materials  of  which  their  houses  were 
constructed,  390.  Their  style  of  temple 
architecture,  391.  The  two  classes  of 
dwellings,  the  domus  and  the  insulae,  391. 
The  mansions  of  the  nobles,  392.  The 
cabins  of  the  poorer  citizens,  392. 

A rduenna,  forest  of,  i.  403. 

Arduinna,  a Gaulish  deitY ; identified  with 
Diana,  iv.  S4. 

Arocomici,  a Belgic  tribe,  their  territory,  i. 

A reins,  the  Alexandrian  philosopher,  accom- 
panies Octavius  in  his  entr)  into  Alexan- 
dria, iii.  266. 

Arelate,  or  Arelas  (Arles),  legions  stationed 
at,  ii.  63. 

Arenacum  (Arnheim?),  on  the  old  Rhine, 
vi.  409. 

Argiletum,  the  grove  of,  inhabited  by  arti- 
zans,  iv.  382. 

Ariminum,  its  occupation  by  Caesar,  a decla- 
ration of  war,  ii.  91.  The  three  great  con- 
verging roads  to  it,  100.  Given  up  to  the 
6oldiers  by  the  Triumvirs,  iii.  140. 

Ariobarzanes  II.,  king  of  Cappadocia,  pro- 
tected by  Cicero,  ii.  55.  An  ally  of  Pom- 
peius,  188.  Submits  to  Caesar,  265.  His 
kingdom  seized  by  Pharnaces,  265. 

Ariovistus,  king  of  the  Suevi,  invited  into 
Gaul  by  the  Sequani,  i.  232-234.  Solicits 
the  alliance  of  Rome,  and  receives  the 
title  of  “ Friend  and  Ally,”  236.  Demands 
lands  from  the  Sequani,  237.  His  tyran- 
ny over  the  Gauls,  255.  Refuses  Caesar’s 
terms,  256.  Their  conference,  260.  De- 
feated and  compelled  to  cross  the  Rhine, 
261. 

Aristides,  his  apology  for  the  Christians  re- 
ceived by  Hadrian,  vii.  369. 

Aristo,  Claudius,  case  of,  vii.  216. 

Aristo,  T.,  the  jurisconsult,  causes  of  his 
suicide,  vii.  258. 

Aristobulus,  younger  brother  of  Hyrcanus, 
assumes  the  title  of  king,  i.  139.  Deposed 
by  Pompeius,  139. 

Aristobulus,  son  of  Hyrcanus,  the  first  to 
assume  the  title  of  king  in  Judea,  iii.  298. 
Brought  to  Rome  by  Pompeius,  292. 
Poisoned,  301. 

Aristobulus,  brother  of  Mariamne,  drowned 
by  Herod’s  contrivance,  iii.  306. 

Aristobulus,  son  of  Herod,  his  liberty  ob- 
tained by  his  father,  iv.  162.  Put  to  death 
by  his  father,  216.  His  children  in  Rome, 
v.  276. 

Aristocracy,  general  result  of  the  struggle 
between  democracy  and,  v.  96.  The  bal- 
ance trimmed  by  the  tact  of  Augustus, 
98.  More  logical  character  of  the  policy 
of  Tacitus,  98. 

Armenia,  war  of  Luenllus  with,  i.  417.  At- 
tacked by  M.  Antonius,  iii.  225.  Part  of 
it  cf  ded  to  Parthia,  iii  237.  Under  the 
protection  of  Rome.  iv.  117  Afiairs  of 
Armenia  in  b.  c.  6-1.  213.  And  in  a.d.  18, 
v.  63.  Receives  a king  from  Germanicus, 
63.  Its  condition  at  the  close  of  the  reign 
of  Augustus,  268.  Invaded  by  the  Par- 


thians,  and  defended  by  Corbulo,  vi.  255. 
Its  king,  Tiridates,  does  homage  to  Nero, 
26S;  vii.  297.  Interference  of  the  Par- 
thians  with  Armenia,  297.  Declared  by 
Trajan  the  vassal  of  Rome,  298.  Tra- 
jan’s expedition  into,  300.  Both  the  Ar- 
menias  annexed  to  the  Roman  empire, 
300,  303.  Relinquished  by  Hadrian,  313. 
Protected  from  Parthia  by  Antoninus 
Pius,  401.  Revival  of  the  Parthian  claims 
457.  Rescued  by  the  generals  of  M.  Au- 
relius, who  assumes  the  title  of  Armeni- 
cus,  457. 

Arminius,  the  Cheruscan,  educated  at  Rome, 

iv.  271.  Devotes  himself  to  the  liberation 
of  Germany,  271.  Destroys  Yarns  and 
three  legions,  272-274.  Besieges  Segestes, 

v.  32.  Attacked  by  the  Romans  under 
Germanicus,  33.  His  unsuccessful  attack 
on  Ctecina,  34.  His  parley  with  lii3 
brother  Flavius,  38.  Defeated  by  Ger- 
manicus, 41,  42.  His  Avar  with  the  Suevi 
and  Marcomanni,  53,  54.  Defeats  Maro- 
boduus,  54.  His  death  and  character,  55. 

Armorica,  the -first  known  inhabitants  of,  i. 
217.  Close  union  of  its  tribes,  and  their 
affinity  with  those  of  the  northern  coast 
of  Gaul,  i.  21S.  Subjugated,  but  again 
rebel  against  Rome,  289.  Dispersed,  396. 
Held  in  check  by  Duratius  the  Picton,  ii. 
37.  Becomes  a portion  of  the  Lugdunen- 
sis,  iv.  76. 

Arms,  improved,  introduced  by  Camillus,  i. 
1S9. 

Army ; the  command  of  the  national  army 
retained  by  the  nobles,  i.  86.  Abolition 
of  the  property  qualification  of  recruits, 
87  note.  Readiness  of  the  settled  veterans 
of  Sulla  for  tumult  and  revolt,  SS.  Panic 
in  Caesar’s  army  in  Gaul,  257.  Composi- 
tion of  Caesar’s  legions,  263.  Comparison 
between  Romans  and  Gauls  as  soldiers, 
282.  The  Roman  method  of  fighting.  254. 
Composition  of  Caesar’s  legions,  ii.  68,  69. 
Mutiny  among  his  soldiers  at  Placentia, 
176.  Careful  training  of  the  Roman  sol- 
dier, 210.  The  Roman  body  armour,  235. 
Disaffection  of  Caesar’s  veterans  in  Cam- 
pania, 271-282.  The  mutiny  quelled,  282. 
Decay  of  military  discipline  among  the 
Romans,  423.  The  military  oath  of  obe- 
dience taken  to  the  emperor  as  general  of 
the  armies,  iii.  351.  Establishment  of  \ 
Roman  standing  army,  411.  The  em 
peror’s  body-guard  and  garrison  of  th* 
city,  412.  Pay  and  length  of  service  ol 
the  legionaries,  414.  Numbers  of  the  im 
perial  military  establishment,  415.  Lii  ni  ts 
of  military  service  determined  by  Augus- 
tus, iv.  161.  Troops  and  fortifications  by 
which  the  Pax  Romana  was  secured,  345. 
Discontent  of  the  legions  in  Pannonia, 
v.  18.  Drusus  sent  to  quell  the  mutiny,  19. 
Mutiny  among  the  legions  on  the  Rhine, 
20.  Quelled  by  Germanicus,  21.  Stations 
of  the  legions'  under  Tiberius,  142.  The 
urban  and  praetorian  cohorts,  143.  The 
discipline  of  the  legions  strenuously  main- 
tained by  Tiberius,  143.  Stations  of  the 
presidiary  legions  in  Britain,  vi.  40.  Mode 
of  raising  and  pay  of  the  legionaries  and 
of  the  praetorian  cohorts,  257,  258.  Atti- 


504 


INDEX. 


tudu  of  the  legions  and  their  chiefs  in  the 
provinces  at  the  commencement  of  the 
reign  of  Galha,  296.  Discharge  of  the 
praitorians  and  disposal  of  the  Othonian 
legions  by  Vitellus,  343.  Military  disturb- 
ance at  Ticinum,  344.  Eeembodiment 
of  the  praetorian  and  urban  guards,  354. 
Mutiny  on  the  Rhine,  and  break-up  of  a 
Roman  army,  398.  Favour  shown  by 
Domitian  to  the  army,  vii.  131.  Doubtful 
attitude  of  the  legions  at  the  accession  of 
Nerva,  161.  The  tone  of  society  corrupted 
by  the  soldiery  in  the  reign  of  Trajan,  261. 
The  discipline  of  the  army  maintained  by 
Hadrian,  342.  State  of  the  praetorians  and 
of  the  regular  army  during  the  Flavian 
era,  442.  Mercenary  character  of  the  reg- 
ular army,  443.  Relaxation  of  discipline, 

443.  Emoluments  of  service,  443.  Per- 
manence of  the  constitution  of  the  legion, 

444.  Roman  system  of  defence,  445. 
Anxiety  of  the  emperors  generally  to  re- 
press the  military  spirit  of  the  soldiery, 
447.  The  emperors  the  champions  of  the 
army,  and  the  senate  finally  overpowered 
by  the  soldiers,  448.  Pestilence  spread  bj7 
the  army  on  its  return  from  the  East,  461. 

Arecomici,  akin  to  the  Belgae,  i.  227. 

Arretium,  seized  by  M.  Antonins  for  Ccesar, 

ii.  100.  Held  for  Augustus,  iii.  93. 

Arria,  the  elder,  and  Paetus,  story  of,  v.  411 : 
vi.  172. 

Arria,  the  younger,  her  suicide,  vi.  172;  vii. 
396.  Commended  by  Pliny,  258. 

Arria,  mother  of  M.  Antonins,  vii.  396. 

Arruntins,  L.,  designated  by  Augustus  as  a 
possible  competitor  for  the  empire,  v.  10. 
His  history  and  death,  242,  244. 

Arsaces,  founder  of  a race  of  Parthian  kings, 
i.  408. 

Arsacida?,  foundation  of  the  dynasty  of  the, 
i.  408.  Obnoxious  to  their  Persian  sub- 
jects, 410. 

Arsinoe,  sister  of  Cleopatra,  aspires  to  the 
throne,  ii.  258-260.  Induces  Ganymedes 
to  assassinate  Achillas,  260.  Taken  pris- 
oner by  Ciesar,  263.  Led  in  triumph  by 
him,  310.  Put  to  death  by  Antonius,  iii. 
175,  176. 

Artabanus,  seizes  the  throne  of  Armenia, 
v.  268.  Compelled  to  flee  into  Hyrcania, 
but  subsequently  restored,  268. 

Artabazes,  or  Artavasdes,  king  of  Armenia, 
his  advice  to  Crassus  slighted,  i.  417,  420. 
Attacked  by  Orodes,  king  of  Parthia,  422. 
Denounced  by  Crassus  as  a traitor,  422. 
Comes  to  terms  with  Orodes,  429.  His 
daughter  marries  the  Parthian  Pacorus, 
429."  Disaffected  to  Rome,  ii  55.  Deserts 
Antonius  in  Media,  iii.  221.  Revenge 
planned  by  Antonius,  223.  Surrenders  to 
Antonius,  and  led  in  chains  through  Alex- 
andria, 225.  Put  to  death  by  Cleopatra, 
260. 

Artavasdes,  king  of  Media  Atropatene,  be- 
sieged in  Praaspa  by  Antonius,  iii.  222. 
Reconciled  with  Antonius,  223.  Obtains 
from  him  a share  of  Armenia,  and  fur- 
nishes him  with  cavalr}',  237.  His  daugh- 
ter Jotape  betrothed  to  Alexander,  son  of 
Antonius  and  Cleopatra,  237. 

Artaxata,  capital  of  Media,  on  the  Araxes. 


iii.  225.  Burnt  by  Corbulo,  vi.  265.  Taken 
by  Statius  Priscus,  vii.  456. 

Artaxias,  son  of  the  Armenian  Artavasdea 
massacres  all  the  Romans  in  his  kingdom, 

iv.  117.  Puts  himself  under  the  protec- 
tion of  Parthia,  and  murdered  by  his  sub- 
jects, 117. 

Artemidorus,  the  philosopher,  banished, 
vii.  148. 

Artemion,  leads  a sanguinar}7  revolt  of  the 
Jews  in  Cyprus,  vii.  309. 

Artemis,  temple  of,  at  Ephesus,  its  privi- 
leges of  sanctuary,  iv.  106. 

Arulenus  Rusticus  hunted  to  death,  vii.  147. 

Arverni,  the,  defeated  by  Fabius  Maximus, 
i.  196.  Treated  with  consideration,  197. 
The  head  of  the  great  confederation  of  the 
Galli,  214.  Their  dwelling-place,  214. 
Lose  their  ascendency,  233, 216.  Join  the 
league  of  Vercingetorix,  ii.  13.  Invasion 
of  their  territory  by  Caesar,  16, 19.  Sus- 
pends Caesar’s  sword  in  one  of  their  tem- 
ples, but  are  defeated  by  him,  28,  29. 
Arvernian  prisoners  liberated  by  Caesar, 
34. 

Arx,  the,  or  citadel,  of  Rome,  iv.  376. 

Ascalon,  its  Greek  writers,  iii.  294. 

Asciburgium,  taken  by  Civilis,  vi.  395. 

Asconius  Labeo,  Nero’s  guardian,  vi.  84. 

Asculum,  taken  by  Caesar,  ii.  103. 

Asia,  province  of,  134.  The  political  organi- 
zation of  the  region  of  Lower  Asia,  iv.  104. 
This  province  the  earliest  acquisition  of 
the  republic  east  of  the  JSgean,  105.  Its 
extent,  division  into  regions  and  conven- 
tus,  105.  Arrangements  of  Augustus  for 
its  government,  106.  Its  vassal  kings, 
and  their  subservience  to  the  chiefs  of  the 
Roman  state,  109.  Population  of  the 
Roman  provinces  of  Asia,  341.  State  of 
the  cities  of  Asia,  Greek  and  Macedonia, 
in  the  time  of  Augustus,  360-362.  Eleven 
cities  of  Asia  contend  for  the  honor  of 
making  Tiberius  their  tutelar  divinity, 

v.  193. 

Asiaticus,  freedman  of  Yitellius,  vi.  354. 
Crucified,  376. 

Asiaticus  Valerius.  See  Valerius. 

Asinius  Gallus,  son  of  Asinius  Pollio,  desig- 
nated by  Augustus  as  a possible  compet- 
itor for  the  empire,  v.  10.  His  question 
to  Tiberius  in  the  senate,  16.  Marries 
Vipsania,  the  divorced  wife  of  Tiberius, 
217.  Cruelly  treated  by  Tiberius,  21 S. 

Asinius  Gallus,  son  ef  the  above,  his  abortive 
attempt  on  the  life  of  Claudius,  v.  411 
note  'l. 

Asinius  Pollio.  See  Pollio. 

Asmonean  family,  cut  off  by  Herod,  iii.  305. 

Aspasius,  the  sophist,  his  teaching  at  Athens, 
vii.  361. 

Asprenas  prevents  Arminius  from  crossing 
the  Rhine,  iv.  275. 

Assassination,  prevalence  and  publicity  of, 
in  Italy,  ii.  332. 

Assyria,  the  new  province  of,  created  by 
Trajan,  vii.  305.  Abandoned  by  Hadrian, 
332  note  I. 

Astura,  a maritime  residence  of  Cicero,  iii. 
145. 

Astures,  a Spanish  tribe,  i.  155. 

Astarte,  the  Syrian  goddess,  worshipped  a 1 


INDEX. 


505 


Rome,  vi.  200.  Her  rites  described,  202. 
Honored  and  then  condemned  by  Nero, 
250. 

Astrologers  expelled  from  Italy  by  Tiberius, 
v.  149.  And  by  Vitellius,  vi.  342.  Domi- 
tian’s  edicts  against  them,  vii.  111. 

Asylum,  right  of,  limited  by  Tiberius,  v.  151. 

Ateins,  tribune,  i.  342.  Violence  of  his 
colleague,  Trebonius,  343.  His  impreca- 
tions upon  Crassus  as  he  quits  Home, 
413. 

A tlienasum,  the,  established  by  Hadrian  at 
Rome,  vii.  381. 

A.thens,  submits  to  the  Csesarians  under  the 
Calenus,  ii.  252.  Extravagant  behaviour 
of  M.  Antonius  at,  iii.  190.  Mulcted  of  its 
privileges  by  Augustus,  iv.  103.  Its  con- 
dition in  the  time  of  Augustus,  354.  Its 
inhabitants  debased  in  blood.  354.  Its 
architectural  splendour,  356.  Its  univer- 
sity, professors,  and  philosophers,  357. 
Nero  shrinks  from  visiting  it,  vi.  273. 
Visited  and  embellished  by  Hadrian,  vii. 
852,  354.  Its  appearance  and  contrast  of 
its  public  and  private  buildings  in  the 
time  of  Hadrian,  355.  The  university  of 
the  Roman  world,  358.  Conservative 
character  of  its  university,  859.  Its  pro- 
fessional system  described,  360.  The 
sophists  and  their  teaching,  361.  The 
Christians  at  Athens,  368.  Dissatisfaction 
)f  Hadrian  with  the  conservative  spirit 
3f  the  university,  S70. 

Atia,  her  letteis  to  her  son  Octavius,  iii.  55. 

Atra,  city  of  the  sun,  unsuccessfully  be- 
sieged by  Trajan,  vii.  307,  308. 

Atrebates,  a Belgian  tribe,  join  the  confede- 
racy against  the  Romans,  i.  267.  Defeated 
by  Caesar,  274. 

Attianus,  guardian  of  Hadrian,  vii.  324.  Ap- 
pointed praetorian  prefect,  331. 

Atticus,  T.  Pomponius,  his  character,  i.  015, 
316. 

Attilius,  the  “Electra”  of,  performed  at 
Caesars  funeral,  iii.  37. 

Attilius,  a senator  who  conspired  against 
Antoninus  Pius,  condemned  by  ihe  senate, 
vii.  399. 

Attius  Varus,  a Pompeian,  ii.  102. 

Attius  Rufus  accuses  Afranius  of  treachery 
in  Spain,  ii.  225. 

Attuarii,  a German  tribe,  submit  to  Tibe- 
rius, iv.  237. 

Audasius,  his  plot  to  carry  off  Agrippa  Post- 
humus and  Julia  from  their  places  of 
exile,  iv.  256. 

Auditorium,  the,  of  the  emperor,  described, 
vii.  438. 

Aufidena,  settlement  of  the  Roman  colony 
of,  ii.  328,  329. 

Augury,  Etruscan,  ii.  395.  The  science 
cultivated  by  the  Romans,  395,  396.  Du- 
ties of  the  augurs,  iii.  371. 

Augusta  Pretoria  (Aosta),  military  colony 
of,  founded  by  Augustus  at,  iv.  89.  His 
triumphal  arch  at,  89. 

Augusta  Trevirorum  (Treves),  colony  of, 
founded  by  Galba,  vi.  387. 

Augusta  Vindelicorum  (Augsburg),  founda- 
tion of,  iv.  177. 

Augusta,  the  title  o£  conferred  on  Livia, 
v.  13. 

137 


Augustales,  a college  of  priests  established 
in  honor  of  Augustus,  iv.  79. 

Augustalia,  establishment  of  the  festival  of 
the,  iii.  369. 

Augustus  (at  first  Octavius),  son  of  C.  Oc 
tavius  and  Atia,  and  niece  of  Julius  Caesar, 
his  birth,  ii.  367.  Iiis  education  superin- 
tended by  his  mother,  by  his  step-father, 
L.  Marcius  Philippus,  and  by  C&jsar,  who 
adopts  him,  ii.  867.  His  delicate  health 
and  personal  beauty,  368.  Sent  to  Apol- 
lonia  in  Illyricum  to  prosecute  his  stu- 
dies, and  raised  to  patrician  rank,  368. 
Declared  in  Ciesar’s  will  his  principal 
heir  and  adopted  son,  iii.  32,  33.  Returns 
to  Italy  on  the  news  of  Caesar’s  death, 
claims  his  inheritance,  and  assumes  the 
name  of  C.  Julius  Caesar  Octavianus,  56. 
Is  warmly  received  by  the  veterans,  and 
makes  a favorable  impression  on  Cicero, 
57,  58.  Enters  Rome,  59.  Effect  of  the 
omens  which  are  said  to  have  accompa- 
nied his  career,  59,  60.  Courts  the  senate, 
and  pledges  himself  to  discharge  Ca?sar’s 
bequests,  61.  His  harangue  to  the  people, 

61.  His  first  interview  with  Antonius, 
who  withholds  from  him  his  inheritance, 

62.  Raises  the  money  and  pays  Caesar’s 
legacies,  62.  Exhibits  the  show's  vowed 
by  Caesar  to  Venus  the  Ancestress.  63. 
His  popularity,  64.  He  claims  and  is 
refused  by  Antonius  the  throne  and 
crown  decreed  by  the  senate  to  his  adopt- 
ing father,  64.  Blows  aimed  by  him  at 
the  popularity  of  Antonius,  79.  Their 
hollow  reconciliation,  79.  His  quarrel  with 
Antonius,  89.  Octavius  collects  troops 
and  quarters  them  at  Arretium,  90.  Com- 
plaint of  Antonius  against  him,  92.  Two 
of  the  Antonian  legions  go  over  to  him, 
92.  His  armaments,  93.  Alba  declares 
for  him  and  his  party  increases,  93.  Cic- 
ero’s mistaken  estimate  of  him,  97. 
Offers  to  defend  Decimus  Brutus 
against  Antonius,  101.  Hesitation  of 
the  senate  to  accept  his  aid,  102.  Places 
himself  under  the  command  of  Hertius, 
105.  Posted  at  Forum  Cornelii,  108.  De- 
mands of  the  senate  authorization  to  at- 
tack Antonius  as  a public  enemy,  114. 
The  senate  cajole  him  with  titles,  but 
withhold  their  assent,  114.  He  carries  off 
the  dead  body  of  Hirtius,  119.  Suspected 
by  Decimus  Brutus,  125.  Declines  to 
pursue  Antonius,  125.  Remains  at  Muti- 
na,  126.  Complaints  of  Plancus  against 
him,  127.  All  hope  from  him  abandoned 
by  Cicero,  127.  Contumaciously  treated 
by  the  senate,  128.  Demands  the  consul- 
ship, 130.  Offers  to  combine  with  Lepidus 
and  Antonius,  131.  Marches  on  Rome, 
and  compels  the  senate  to  declare  him 
consul  with  his  cousin  Pedius,  131,  132. 
Leaves  Rome  and  opens  negotiations  with 
Antonius  and  Lepidus,  134.  Formation  of 
the  second  triumvirate,  137.  The  govern- 
ment of  Sicily,  Sardinia,  and  Africa,  with 
three  legions  allotted  to  him,  138.  The 
proscription,  139.  Abandons  Cicero  to 
Antonius,  139,  140.  Espouses  Clodia. 
daughter  of  P.  Clodius  and  Fulvia,  140. 
His  lenity  in  favourable  contrast  with  hil 


506 


INDEX. 


colleagues’  corruption  or  cruelty,  154. 
Resigns  the  consulship  to  Ventidius,  156. 
Arms  against  Sextus  Pompeius,  but  finds 
himself  unable  to  cope  with  him  at  sea, 
161.  Joins  Antonius  in  the  East,  161. 
His  sickness  at  Dyrrachium,  162.  His 
camp  at  Philippi  stormed  by  Brutus,  167. 
Retires  to  Italy  after  the  victory  at  Philip- 
pi, 171.  Confiscates  lands  in  Italy  to 
satisfy  the  legionaries,  176.  Combination 
formed  by  L.  Antonius  against  him,  179. 
Recalls  Salvidienus  from  Spain  with  six 
legions,  179.  Besieges  Perusia,  ISO.  Idle 
report  of  his  offering  three  hundred  pris- 
oners at  Perusia  to  the  shade  of  Caesar, 
ISO.  His  apprehension  of  another  civil 
war,  1S2.  The  soldiers  compel  him  and 
Antonius  to  come  to  an  accommodation, 
182.  Divorces  Clodia  and  marries  Scri- 
bonia,  183.  Gives  his  sister  in  marriage 
to  Antonius,  1S3.  Treaty  of  Misenum, 
between  Sextus  Pompeius  and  the  Trium- 
virs, 187.  Octavius  repairs  to  Gaul,  1S9. 
Renewal  of  the  war  with  Sextus  Pom- 
peius, 192.  Misfortunes  of  Octavius  at 
sea,  194,  198,  200.  Treaty  of  Tarentum, 
and  renewal  of  the  triumvirate  for  five 
years,  197.  End  of  the  naval  war  with 
Sextus,  201.  Octavius  defeats  Lepidus, 
but  spares  his  life,  203.  Becomes  the  head 
of  the  Caisarian  or  Marian  interest,  206. 
His  increasing  popularity,  207.  Restores 
order  at  Rome,  207.  His  ministers  Agrip- 
pa, Mcecenas,  aud  Messala,  211-217.  His 
matrimonial  alliances,  217.  Divorces  Scri- 
bonia  and  marries  Livia  Drusilla,  217, 
21S.  His  popularity  in  Rome,  232.  His 
campaigns  against  the  Salassians,  Pan- 
nonians  and  Dalmatians  restore  his  mili- 
tary reputation,  232, 233.  His  amicable  re- 
lations with  Antonius,  233.  Their  rup- 
ture and  mutual  recriminations,  236.  Oc- 
tavius declares  war  against  Cleopatra,  242. 
His  preparations,  244"  Assumes  the  con- 
sulship with  his  friend  Messala,  and  re- 
signs the  triumvirate,  244.  His  arma- 
ments compared  with  those  of  Antonius, 
245.  Crosses  the  Ionian  gulf,  246.  Takes 
Corcyra,  247.  Leads  a squadron  at  the 
battle  of  Actium,  251.  The  victory  at 
Actium  as  described  by  the  Augustan 
poets,  253.  Nicopolis  founded  by"  Octa- 
vius in  commemoration  of  it,  257.  His 
treatment  of  the  captives  of  Actium,  257. 
Lands  in  Egypt,  263.  Refuses  the  chal- 
lenge of  Antonius  to  single  combat,  264. 
Enters  Alexandria,  266.  His  interview 
with  Cleopatra,  267,  268.  Puts  Coesarion 
and  others  to  death,  but  thenceforward  is 
remarkable  for  clemency,  270-272.  Re- 
duces Egypt  to  the  form  of  a province  un- 
der his  own  direct  control,  279.  Visits  the 
tomb  of  Alexander,  but  declines  seeing 
the  remains  of  the  Ptolemies,  280,  2S1. 
Settles  the  affairs  of  Parthia  and  Judea, 
281.  Confirms  Herod  in  his  kingdom, 
807.  Tacitus’s  review  of  the  position  of 
Octavius  after  the  close  of  the  civil  wars, 
310.  Puts  Lepidus.  son  of  the  ex-trium- 
vir, to  death,  312.  Enters  on  his  fifth  con- 
sulship in  Asia,  813.  His  reception  in 
Rome,  818.  His  triple  triumph,  814.  His 


dedication  of  temples,  games  and  speo 
tacles.  and  opening  of  the  Julian  basilica, 
814,  815.  Divine  honours  paid  to  him, 
819.  Closes  the  temple  of  Janus,  821. 
Surveys  his  position,  828.  Pretended 
debate  between  him  and  Agrippa  and 
Maecenas  whether  he  should  "resign  the 
supreme  power,  323.  Assumes  the  prefix 
of  Imperator,  declines  the  title  but  ac- 
cepts the  substance  of  the  censorship,  and 
revises  the  senatorian  roll,  824-827  ; iv. 
141.  Regarded  as  the  fountain  of  he  nour, 

iii.  827.  Takes  a census  of  the  Roman 
people,  828.  Agrippa,  his  colleague  in  the 
censorship,  confers  on  Octavius  the  title 
of  Princeps , 829.  His  liberal  and  mag- 
nanimous conduct,  329,  330.  Consecrates 
the  temple  of  Apollo  on  the  Palatine,  830. 
Repetition  of  his  offer  to  lay  down  the 
Imperium,  331-833.  Resumes  it  for  ten 
years  (Decennium  I.)  with  proconsular 
power,  and  divides  the  provinces  between 
himself  and  the  senate,  884.  Takes  the 
title  of  Augustus,  335.  His  reasons  for 
preferring  it  to  that  of  Quirinus,  Romulus, 
or  any  recognized  designation  of  sovereign 
rule,  835.  Quits  Rome  and  visits  the 
provinces,  836.  Released  by  tho  senate 
from  the  provisions  of  the  Lex  Oincia  de 
Muneribus,  837,  83S.  His  relations  re- 
leased from  those  of  the  Lex  annalis,  888. 
Question  of  the  succession  during  his 
dangerous  sickness  in  Spain,  338.  Delivers 
his  signet  ring  to  Agrippa,  341.  Recovers, 
declines  the  consulship,  and  accepts  the 
potestas  tribunitia , 841.  Review  of  the 
imperial  government  as  organized  by 
him,  843-858.  Importance  of  the  title 
Princeps  Senatus  to  Augustus,  853.  His 
numerous  consulships,  358, 359.  Declines 
the  office  after  b.  o.  23, 359.  Receives  pro- 
consular authority  throughout  the  em- 
pire. and  the  potestas  tribunitia  for  life, 
859-361.  Import  of  these  functions,  362 ; 

iv.  162.  Conspiracies  of  Murena  and 
Ciepio  against  his  life,  iii.  367.  He  retires 
and  refuses  to  return  to  Rome  for  a time, 
867 ; iv.  170.  Accepts  the  potestas  con- 
sularis , iii.  869;  iv.  174.  And  the  su- 
preme pontificate,  iii.  371.  The  name  of 
the  month  Sextilis  changed  to  that  of 
Augustus,  373  ; iv.  190.  Legislative  and 
iudicial  functions  of  Augustus  examined, 
his  edicts,  rescripts,  and  constitutions,  iii. 
876-378.  The  import  of  the  term  legibus 
solutus  and  Lex  Regia,  379-382.  Perpet 
uation  of  the  title  of  Caesar,  883, 3St.  Re 
view  of  the  imperial  administration,  885. 
Augustus  affects  to  maintain  the  estima- 
tion of  Roman  citizenship,  390.  Main- 
tains the  dignity  of  the  senatorian  order, 
893.  Revives  the  office  of  prefect  i f the 
city,  402;  iv.  145.  llis  body-guard,  city- 
garrison,  and  vigiJes  or  the  watch,  iii 
412,  413.  His  military  establishment,  415. 
His  navy,  416.  Character  of  his  sover- 
eignty, 426-429.  Monarchy  manifestly  in- 
dispensable in  his  time,  428.  Attempts 
to  revive  a religious  feeling  among  the 
Romans,  iv.  18-27.  His  restoration  of  the 
temples,  24.  His  laws  for  enforcing  mar- 
riage, 88.  His  regulations  for  the  dis 


INDEX. 


507 


tinclion  of  classes,  41.  His  restrictions 
on  the  manumission  of  slaves,  42.  His 
jurisprudence,  4-3.  Review  of  his  policy. 
44 r-47.  Congratulates  himself  on  the  ac- 
complishment of  his  patriotic  schemes, 
47.  Moderation  in  his  personal  habits, 
50-52.  His  demeanor  at  the  theatre  and 
circus,  5-3.  Receives  the  title  of  Pater 
Patrice , 53, 147,  209.  His  organization  of 
the  provinces,  60,  et  seq.  Pacifies  the 
province  of  Spain,  62.  His  military  opera- 
tions and  sickness,  63.  His  policy  in  the 
organization  of  Gaul,  72.  His  encamp- 
ments on  the  left  bank  of  the  Rhine,  81. 
Discountenances  the  Druids,  83.  Intro- 
duces the  Roman  polytheism  into  Gaul, 
84.  Worshipped  by  the  Gauls,  84.  Satis- 
fied with  the  promise  of  tribute  Irom  the 
Britons,  85.  Progress  of  the  Roman  arms 
in  Maesia  and  Thrace,  89.  Gives  the  king- 
dom of  Mauretania  to  Juba,  king  of  Xumi- 
dia,  91.  His  organization  of  the  province 
of  Africa,  92.  And  of  the  Cyrenaica,  93. 
Sends  an  expedition  against  the  Arabians, 
97.  Releases  the  Ethiopians  from  an  an- 
nual tribute,  103.  His  progress  in  the 
East,  103.  Metes  compensation  or  retri- 
bution to  the  cities  of  Asia,  106.  Returns 
to  Samos,  117.  Account  of  the  members 
of  the  Caesarian  family,  124-128.  Sends 
Agrippa  on  a mission  to  the  East,  129. 
Augustus’s  illness  and  recovery,  129,  130. 
Again  accepts  the  tribunitian  power,  130. 
Pronounces  the  funeral  oration  of  Mar- 
cellus,  133.  His  uneasy  relations  with 
Agrippa,  134-137.  Returns  to  Rome,  138. 
His  legislation,  141.  Accepts  the  Im- 
perium  for  five  years,  142.  His  Ludi 
Sceculares , 142.  Formally  institutes  the 
prefecture  of  the  city,  145.  And  of 
a “ Council  of  State,”  146.  Studious 
moderation  of  his  demeanour,  147.  Free- 
dom of  his  counsellor  Maecenas,  149. 
Augustus  represents  conservatism,  Mae- 
cenas progress,  151.  Augustus  adopts 
Caius  and  Lucius,  the  sons  of  Agrippa  by 
Julia,  155.  In  Gaul,  summoned  by  the 
disaster  of  Lollius,  and  the  oppressions  of 
Li cin us,  156-158.  Receives  the  submission 
of  the  Cantabrians,  161.  Returns  to  Rome, 
161.  Becomes  chief  pontitf  on  the  death 
©f  Lepidus,  165.  Pronounces  the  funeral 
oration  over  the  body  of  Agrippa,  166. 
Begins  the  custom  of  sitting  one  day  in 
the  year  in  the  garb  of  a mendicant,  184. 
Supposed  cause  of  this  observance,  184. 
Pronounces  the  funeral  oration  over  Oc- 
tavio, 186.  And  over  Drusus  Nero,  186. 
Third  decennial  term  of  the  Imperium, 
188.  Takes  up  his  residence  at  Lugdu- 
num,  188.  His  treachery  to  the  German 
hostages  there,  1S9.  His  affection  for  his 
laughter  Julia,  202.  Education  of  Caius 
md  Lucius,  205.  Introduces  Caius  to  the 
people,  208.  His  indignation  at  the  dis- 
covery of  his  daughter  and  granddaughter 
Julia’s  profligacy,  210,  257.  Deaths  of 
Lucius  and  Caius  Ccesar,  217,  219.  His 
book  of  letters  addressed  to  his  grandson 
Caius,  219.  Recalls  and  adopts  Tiberius, 
and  invests  him  with  the  tribunitian  power 
for  five  years,  221  His  continuod  labours, 


221.  Conspiracy  of  Cinna,  222.  Clemency 
of  Augustus,  224.  Reflections  on  the 
story,  226.  Private  life  and  habits  of 
Augustus,  226-228.  His  taste  and  literary 
style,  228.  Addicted  to  superstition,  230. 
His  good  humour  and  gentleness,  231. 
His  hesitation  in  the  prosecution  of  the 
war  in  Germany,  241.  His  alarm  at  the 
outbreak  of  the  Pannonian  and  Dalmatian 
war,  248.  Banishes  Agrippa  Postumus, 
252,  253.  His  family  solitude  and  in- 
creasing cares,  255.  Fresh  conspiracies 
against  him,  256.  Banishes  his  grand- 
daughter Julia,  257.  And  Ovid,  257-262. 
His  distress  at  the  loss  of  Yarns  and  his 
legions,  278.  His  spirited  conduct,  275- 

278.  Begins  to  retire  from  public  life, 

279.  His  reported  visit  to  Agrippa  Post- 
humus in  banishment,  201.  His  last  cen- 
sus, 283.  His  valetudinarian  habits,  283 
note  '.  His  Monumentum  Ancyranum, 
284,  285.  His  last  days,  285.  Calmness 
with  which  he  contemplates  the  approach 
of  death,  286  Contracts  a dysentery  at 
Astura,  286.  His  last  moments,  288.  His 
death,  288.  Effect  of  success  upon  his 
character,  2S9.  His  enthusiasm  and  be- 
lief in  his  own  divinity.  289.  Concluding 
reflections  on  his  life, -290.  Panegyric  of 
Philo  upon  him,  291  note h His  palace 
on  the  Palatine  Hill,  373.  His  will,  v.  13, 
14.  His  last  public  counsels,  14.  Fu- 
neral honours  decreed  him,  15.  Com- 
parison between  him  and  Tiberius,  162. 

Augustani,  a band  of  young  nobles  enrolled 
to  applaud  Nero,  v.  106;  vi.  278. 

Augustodunum,  tk  Hill  of  Augustus”  (Au- 
tun),  its  name  changed  from  Bibracte  to, 
iv.  78.  The  literary  metropolis  of  Gaul, 
82.  The  school  founded  there  by  Augus- 
tus, 82.  Revolt  of  the  Gauls  in,  v.  169, 
170.  One  of  the  centres  of  Druidism,  vi. 
10. 

Augustus,  the  name  of  the  month  Sextilis 
changed  to,  iii.  373;  iv.  190. 

Aulerci,  a Gallic  tribe,  i.  281.  Compelled  to 
maintain  Caesar’s  soldiers,  297,  ii.  13. 

Aulus  Persius.  See  Persius. 

Aulus  Plautius,  his  campaigns  in  Britain, 
and  recall,  vi.  22-28.  Honoured  with  the 
greater  triumph,  v.  421.  Story  of  his  wife, 
Pomponia  Gra?cina,  vi.  215. 

Auranitis  annexed  by  Augustus  to  the  pro 
consulate  of  Syria,  iv.  114. 

Aurelia,  mother  of  Caesar,  a matron  of  the 
ancient  stamp,  i.  147,  318.  Instructs  him 
in  the  rudiments  of  the  Roman  tongue, 
vi.  57. 

Aurelian  Road,  the  route  of  the  Roman  ar- 
mies into  Gaul,  i.  287.  Extended  under  the 
name  of  Julian  from  Cisalpine  to  Trans- 
alpine Gaul,  iv.  87. 

Aurelius  Cotta,  uncle  of  Julius  Caesar,  his 
measure  for  distributing  the  judicia 
among  the  senators,  knights,  and  agrarian 
tribunes,  i.  100. 

Aurelius  Fulvus,  father  and  grandfather  of 
Antoninus  Pius,  vii.  395. 

Aurelius,  M.  Antoninus  (born  M.  Annius 
Yerus),  son  of  Hadrian  s sister,  adopted 
by  Antoninus  Pius.  vii.  389.  Marries 
Xnnia  Faustina,  896-409.  His  early  years 


508 


INDEX. 


and  promise,  410.  His  personal  appear- 
ance, 451.  Associates  Ycrus  in  the  em- 
pire, 451.  Disturbances  in  his  reign,  453. 
Reverses  in  the  East,  455.  Triumphs 
■with  Verus,  457.  His  deference  to  the 
6enate,  and  wise  choice  of  ministers,  458- 

460.  Alarmed  at  the  inroads  of  the  bar- 
barians on  the  Danube,  460.  Depopula- 
tion of  the  empire  by  the  pestis  Antonina , 

461,  462.  His  wars  with  the  Quadi  and 
Marcomanni,  464,  465.  Sole  emperor  on 
the  death  of  Verus,  465.  His  victory  over 
the  Quadi  on  the  Danube,  466,  467!  His 
domestic  troubles,  468,469.  His  generous 
behaviour  to  Avidius  Cassius,  469-471. 
Repairs  to  Syria,  472.  At  Alexandria, 
473  Death  of  Faustina,  472.  His  triumph 
over  the  Sarmatians,  473.  His  last  expe- 
dition against  the  Marcomanni,  his  vic- 
tory, illness,  and  death,  474,  475.  Reflec- 
tions on  his  death,  476.  Compared  with 
Alfred  the  Great,  477.  Symptoms  of  de- 
cline throughout  the  empire  at  this  time, 
479.  Decrease  in  population,  480.  Ef- 
fects of  slavery,  481.  His  probable  mo- 
tives for  persecuting  the  Christians,  488. 
Ilis  “Meditations”  or  “Commentaries,” 
their  melancholy  tone,  490-495.  His  statue 
on  the  Campidoglio,  450. 

Autronius,  the  consul,  convicted  of  bribery, 
i.  114.  Joins  Catilina’s  conspiracy,  11*6, 
117. 

Auximum,  declares  for,  and  is  occupied  by, 
Caesar,  ii.  100, 101. 

Avaricum,  capital  of  the  Arverni,  besieged 
and  taken  by  Ca?sar,  ii.  16-18.  Spared" by 
Vercingetorix,  17. 

Aventine  Hill,  contrast  between  it  and  the 
Palatine,  as  sites  for  a city,  i.  18.  Distinct 
from  the  other  seven  hills  of  Rome,  iv. 
869.  Described,  378.  Ravaged  by  the  great 
fire  of  Rome,  vi.  131. 

Avernus,  Lake,  navigable  canal  from  it  to 
Rome,  projected  by  Nero,  vi.  141. 

Avidius  Cassius.  See  Cassius. 

Avilius  Flaccus,  prefect  of  Egypt.  See 
Flaccus. 

r>iETICA.  a senatorian  province,  its  schools 
) and  learned  men,  iv.  68. 

Baia?,  life  of  the  Romans  at,  iv.  864.  Caius’s 
bridge  of  boats  across  the  bay,  v.  332. 
Balbus,  L.  Cornelius,  Caesar’s  friend  and 
steward,  his  rise,  position,  and  character, 
ii.  850,  351.  Refuses  a token  of  respect  to 
Augustus,  iv.  161. 

Balbus,  Octavius,  joins  the  conspirators  after 
Caesar’s  murder,  iii.  12. 

Barcochebas,  the  Jewish  leader,  legends 
respecting  him,  vii.  316.  Nominated  to 
the  chieftainship  of  the  Jewish  people, 
317.  His  struggle  with  the  Romans,  de- 
feat, and  death,  317,  318. 

Bisilus,  L.  Minucius,  lieutenant  of  Caesar  in 
Gaul,  i.  400.  Joins  the  conspiracy  against 
Caesar’s  life,  ii.  374.  Cicero’s  letter  "to,  on 
Caesar’s  assassination,  iii.  25.  Killed  by 
his  own  slaves,  13C. 

Bassus,  Ca?cilius,  a Pompeian,  maintains 
the  senatorian  cause  in  Syria,  ii.  318,  iii. 
98.  Takes  the  city  of  Apamea,  ii.  318. 
His  soldiers  go  over  to  Crassus,  iii.  109, 


159.  Dismissed  unpunished  b)  (Assius, 
159. 

Bassus,  Cesellius,  his  pretended  discovery 
of  the  treasures  of  Dido,  vi.  154 

Bassus,  Roman  governor  at  Alexandria,  v. 
311. 

Batavi,  the,  serve  as  cavalry  in  the  Roman 
armies,  iv.  266.  Their  island  described, 
vi.  8S5.  Their  skill  in  riding  and  swim- 
ming on  horseback,  and  their  usefulness 
as  auxiliaries,  385.  Their  revolt  under 
Claudius  Civilis,  their  chief,  386  et  seq. 
The  island  occupied  by  the  Romans,  410. 

Baths,  fondness  of  the  Romans  for,  iv.  419. 
Baths  of  Maecenas  and  Agrippa,  and  man- 
ners at  them,  419. 

Baths  of  Titus,  vii.  32-34.  Of  Nero,  83  note. 
Of  Caracalla,  Diocletian,  and  Constantine, 
33. 

Batiatus,  escape  of  his  gladiators  at  Capua, 
i.  50. 

Bato,  the  Dalmatian,  heads  a revolt  against 
the  Romans,  but  is  defeated  by  Ciecina, 
iv.  247.  His  answer  to  Tiberius,  255. 

Bato,  the  Pannonian  chief,  attempts  to  carry 
the  post  of  Sirmium,  iv.  247.  Betrays  his 
colleague  Pinnes,  and  chased  by  the  Ro- 
mans from  post  to  post,  255. 

Bedriacum,  first  battle  at,  vi.  384.  Second, 
857.  Vitellius’s  brutality  on  the  field,  £45. 

Belenus,  the  Gallic  Apollo,  i.  224.  Ad- 
mitted to  the  citizenship  of  the  Roman 
Olympus,  iv.  84. 

Belga?,  difference  in  Ca?sar’s  and  Strabo’s 
account  of  them,  i.  215.  Type  of  the  Bel- 
ga1, 217.  The  Belgians  and  Celts  inter- 
mixed with  Teutonic  tribes,  225.  Theii 
character  and  mode  of  life,  226.  Some  of 
their  tribes  penetrate  into  the  south  of 
Gaul,  226.  Combine  against  Rome,  and 
aie  defeated,  267-270.  Submit  to  Caesar, 
281.  Their  territories  invaded  by  the 
Germans,  366.  The  latest  settlers  in 
Britain,  377.  Revolt  of  the  Belgians,  391. 
Besiege  Q.  Cicero,  394.  And  T.  Labienus, 
but  their  confederacy  dissolved,  397,  398. 
Revolt  of  the  Belga1,  but  suppressed,  v. 
168.  Dissatisfaction  of  the  Belgic  tribes, 
vi.  387. 

Belisana,  a Gaulish  deity,  identified  with 
Minerva,  iv.  84. 

Bellienus,  his  house  burnt  at  Caesar’s  fune- 
ral, iii.  42. 

Bellovaci,  a Belgian  tribe,  joins  the  confed- 
eracy against  the  Romans,  i.  267.  Their 
relations  with  Britain  and  submission  to 
Caesar,  271.  Defeated  and  submit  again  to 
Caesar,  ii.  36.  An  insurrection  of,  re- 
pressed by  D.  Brutus,  318.  Reduced  by 
Brutus,  iv.  70. 

Beneventum,  given  up  to  the  soldiers  by 
Augustus,  iii.  140. 

Berenice,  daughter  of  Ptolemaeus  Auletes, 
placed  on  the  throne  of  Egypt  by  the 
populace  of  Alexandria,  i.  850.  Married 
to  Seleucus,  but  strangles  him,  351.  Put 
to  death  by  her  father,  352. 

Berenice,  mother  of  Herod  Agrippa,  at 
Rome,  with  her  children,  v.  276. 

Berenice,  queen  of  Chalcis,  intrigues  with 
Vespasian,  vi.  860.  Married  to  her  uncle 
Herodes,  419. 


INDEX. 


509 


Berenice,  sister  of  Agrippa,  her  relations  to 
Titus  and  dismissal  by  him,  vi.  419,  436 ; 
vii.  43, 45. 

Bericus.  a British  chieftain,  applies  to  Clau- 
dius for  aid,  vi.  20.  The  Veric  of  the 
British  coins  ('?),  20  note  >. 

Berytus  (Beyrout),  colony  of,  founded  by 
Agrippa,  iv.  162  note 

Bessi,  a Thracian  tribe,  plundered  by  M 
Brutus,  iii.  15S. 

Beslia  joins  Catilina’s  conspiracy,  i.  116. 

Bethar,  the  last  stronghold  of  the  Jews,  vii. 
317.  Stormed  and  taken  by  Julius  Seve- 
rus,  318. 

Betuus  Chilo,  his  pretensions  to  the  empire 

vi.  295. 

Bibracte,  or  Bibrax  (Autun),  its  freedom  and 
commerce,  i.  220.  Capital  of  the  JEdui 
(Remi),  214,  250,  268.  Caesar  in,  250.  Be- 
sieged by  the  Suessiones  and  Belg«,  268. 
Gaulish  confederacy  assembles  at,  ii.  27. 
Its  name  changed  to  Augustodunum,  iv.  78. 

Bibroci,  a British  tribe,  submit  to  Caesar,  i. 
388. 

Bibulus,  L.,  surrenders  to  Antonius,  iii.  172. 

Bib  ulus,  M.  Calpurnius,  sedile,  i.  103.  Prae- 
tor, 134.  Consul.  170.  With  Caesar,  vio- 
lently opposed  to  his  colleague  Ca?sar, 
172-173.  His  opinion  on  the  commission- 
ers to  Egypt,  329.  359.  Votes  for  appoint- 
ing Pompeius  sole  consul,  433.  Procon- 
sul of  Syria,  ii.  54.  Commands  the  sena- 
torian  fleet,  169,  189.  Prevents  the  pas- 
sage of  the  Caesarians,  196,  197.  His 
death,  198. 

Bilbilis,  Martial’s  native  city,  vii.  202. 

Biography,  Roman  ; the  writings  of  Tacitus 
more  biographical  than  historical,  vii.  244. 
Preference  of  the  Romans  for  biography, 
248.  The  biographies  of  Suetonius,  243- 
248. 

Biterrae,  Roman  colony  in  Gaul,  i.  208,  213. 

Bithynicus,  proprador  of  Sicily,  surrenders 
to  Sextus  Pompeius,  iii.  160. 

Bithynia,  attempts  of  Mithridates  to  gain 
ossession  of,  i.  42.  Governed  by  Cim- 
er,  iii.  31.  Ceded  to  Rome  by  Nico- 
medes,  iv.  105.  Extended  by  Pompeius, 
and  governed  by  pro-consuls  under  the 
empire,  105,  106.  Pliny’s  administration, 

vii.  214,  289.  The  number  of  Christians 
in  Bithynia,  and  Pliny’s  proceedings 
against  them,  289-291. 

Bituriges,  their  league  with  Dumnorix  and 
the  Helvetii,  i.  250.  Invasion  of  their 
country  by  Ctesar,  ii.  16.  Who  besieges 
and  takes  their  capital  city,  Avaricum, 
16-18. 

Bituitus,  or  Bittus,  king  of  the  Arverni, 
sent  a prisoner  to  Rome,  i.  196.  His  bar- 
baric splendour,  214  note  2. 

Bla^us,  Junius,  mutiny  of  the  legions  under 
his  command  in  Pannonia,  v.  IS.  The 
mutiny  quelled  by  Drusus,  19.  Bleesus 
chosen  proconsul  of  Africa,  167.  Punished 
as  a friend  of  Sejanus,  229.  Poisoned  by 
Vitellius,  vi.  358. 

Boadicea,  queen  of  the  Iceni,  indignities  to 
which  she  and  her  children  were  sub- 
jected. vi.  44.  Sacks  the  Roman  colony  of 
Camulcd unum,  46.  Defeated  by  Sueto- 
nius, 48,  49.  Commits  suicide,  49. 


Bocchus,  king  of  Mauretania,  prepares  to 
aid  the  Csesarians,  ii.  289.  His  death, 

iii.  235. 

Bodugnatus,  chieftain  of  the  Nervii,  opposed 
to  Casar,  i.  273. 

Boduni,  a British  tribe,  submit  to  the  Ro- 
mans, vi.  22. 

Bogudes,  king  of  Mauretania,  ii.  2S9. 

Boii,  defeated  at  the  Vadimonian  Lake,  i. 

191.  Migrate  to  the  banks  of  the  Danube, 

192.  Friends  of  the  iEdui,  305;  ii.  15. 
Allowed  to  remain  in  Gaul,  i.  253.  At- 
tacked by  the  Gauls,  ii.  15. 

Bolanus,  Vettius,  his  prefecture  of  Britain, 
vii.  70. 

Bolgfe,  tribes  of  the,  i.  227. 

B<>na  Dea,  the  mysteries  of,  profaned  by 
Clodius,  i,  147. 

Bononia,  meeting  of  the  Triumvirs  at,  iii. 
137.  Nero  pleads  for  the  distressed  in- 
habitants of  v.  452. 

Books,  production  and  cost  of^  in  Rome. 
See  Literature. 

Bosphorus,  Agrippa’s  settlement  of  the 
affairs  of  the  kingdom  of  the,  iv.  163. 
Given  to  Mithridates,  v.  380. 

Bovianum,  settlement  of  the  Roman  colony 
of,  ii.  328. 

Bratuspantium,  principal  fortress  of  th& 
Bellovaci,  surrenders  to  Caesar,  i.  271. 

Brenni,  the,  conquered  by  Drusus,  iv.  160. 

Brennus  at  Rome,  i.  187. 

Bre  viarium  Imperii  of  Augustus  described 

iv.  328. 

Brigantium,  in  Galicia,  reduced  by  Caesar,  i. 
156. 

Britain,  early  inhabitants  of,  i.  227.  First 
mentioned  in  Roman  history,  290.  Ac- 
count of  them  by  the  Gauls,  375.  Caesar’s 
first  invasion  of  Britain,  377-381.  His 
fleet  injured  by  a high  tide,  382.  His 
army  harassed  by  the  Britons,  3S2.  Re- 
turns to  Gaul,  382.  Exultation  at  Rome 
at  his  British  expedition.  383.  The  mines 
and  pearls  of  Britain,  383.  Caesar’s  prep- 
arations for  a second  invasion,  384.  His 
landing,  336.  Resistance  of  the  Britons 
under  Cassivelaunus,  387.  Caesar’s  par- 
tial successes,  and  return  to  Gaul,  388, 
389.  Augustus  contented  with  a promise 
of  tribute  from  Britain,  iv.  63,  86.  The 
British  expedition  of  Cains,  v.  354.  And 
of  Claudius,  378.  The  Romans  jealous  of 
freedom  in  Britain,  vi.  16.  Relations  of 
Britain  with  the  continent,  17.  Trade  of 
the  south  and  east  of  the  island,  17.  Coin- 
age of  Cunebolinus,  17.  Chief  states  of 
Southern  Britain,  18.  Claudius  prepares 
to  invade  it,  20.  Successes  of  Aulus  Plan* 
tius  and  Vespasian,  22.  They  probably 
do  not  cross  the  Severn,  23.  Claudius 
enters  Britain  and  subdues  the  Trino- 
bantes,  24.  Hailed  imperator  and  tri- 
umphs at  Rome,  25.  Vespasian  in  West 
Britain;  submission  of  the  Re»ni  and 
Iceni,  28.  Campaign  of  Osterius  Scapula, 
28.  Camulodunum  founded,  30.  Temple 
of  Claudius ; the  Claudian  Flamens,  32. 
Distinction  between  the  British  oppidum 
and  the  Roman  urbs,  33.  Revolt  and  de- 
feat of  the  Silures,  33.  The  Britons  con 
tinue  to  resist;  the  Silures  defeat  the 


51C 


INDEX. 


Romans,  39.  The  Roman  province  of 
Britain,  and  stations  of  the  legions,  40. 
Discontent  and  insurrection  of  the  Iceni, 
44.  They  sack  Camulodunum,  45.  The 
Iceni  defeated  and  the  insurrection  sup- 
pressed, 48-50.  Rapid  progress  of  civili- 
zation in  Britain,  51.  Prosecution  of  the 
conquest  under  Doraitian,  vii.  68.  Suc- 
cessive prefects,  69.  Campaigns  of  Agri- 
cola,  71-76.  Enormous  expense  of  the 
conquest,  77.  Discovery  of  the  insular 
character  of  Britain,  77.  Hadrian’s  pro- 
gress in  Britain,  343.  Flourishing  state  of 
the  province,  343-345.  Fortifications  be- 
tween the  Tyne  and  the  Solway,  346.  Tho 
walls  of  Hadrian  and  of  Severus,  and  the 
works  of  the*  age  of  Theodosius  and 
Stilicho,  348.  Completion  of  the  wall  of 
Antoninus,  401.  Disturbances  in  Britain 
in  the  reign  of  M.  Aurelius,  453. 

Britannicus  (Tiberius  Claudius  Germani- 
cus),  son  of  Claudius  and  Messalina  v.  413. 
Takes  a part  in  the  •t  Game  of  Troy,”  421. 
Agrippina’s  enmity  to  him,  423, 443.  Pre- 
vented from  seeing  his  father,  433.  Com- 
miserated by  the  Roman  people,  445.  De- 
tained within  the  palace  while  Nero  is 
proclaimed,  458.  Poisoned  by  Nero,  vi. 
74.  His  funeral,  76. 

Brittan}',  immigrations  of  the  Kymry  into, 
i.  216. 

Bructeri,  a German  tribe,  submit  to  Tiberi- 
us, iv.  237.  Defeated  by  Caecina,  v.  33. 
Destroyed,  vii.  86. 

Brundisium,  occupied  by  Pompeius,  ii.  107. 
Beseiged  by  Caesar,  and  evacuated  by 
Pompeius,  i08, 109.  Occupied  by  Csesar, 
1S5,  195.  Threatened  by  Antonius,  iii. 
182.  Conclusion  of  the  peace  of,  182, 183. 

Brutus,  M.  Junius,  father  of  the  tyrannicide, 
an  adherent  of  Lepidus,  i.  49,  50,  311. 
Slain  by  Pompeius,  311 ; ii.  193. 

Brutus,  Decimus,  his  services  in  Cajsar’s 
Gallic  wars,  i.  264.  Commands  a naval 
armament  against  the  Veneti,  291,  292. 
Harasses  Vercingetorix,  ii.  14.  Commands 
Caesar's  fleet  at  the  seige  of  Massilia,  130. 
His  naval  victory,  i42, 143, 155.  His  sec- 
ond engagement,  157.  Receives  the  pro- 
consulship of  Gaul  beyond  the  Alps,  184, 
281.  Afterwards  of  the  Cisalpine,  where 
he  represses  an  insurrection,  318.  Con- 
sul-designate, 365.  Joins  the  conspiracy 
against  Ciesar,  374.  Determines  Caesar  to 
attend  the  meeting  of  the  senate  on  the 
Ides  cf  March,  381-383.  His  gladiators  a 
body-guard  for  the  conspirators,  iii.  8, 18. 
The  most  active  aDd  self-possessed  of  the 
conspirators,  10,  26.  Appointed  to  the 
government  of  Cisalpine  Gaul,  31.  Named 
in  Caesar's  will  33.  Promised  a libera  le- 
gatio  by  M.  Antonius,  and  assumes  the 
government  of  Cisalpine  Gaul,  66.  An- 
tonius attempts  to  wrest  the  province 
- from  him,  81.  Awaits  attack,  and  pre- 
ares  to  maintain  his  position,  94.  Shuts 
imself  up  in  Mutina,  and  is  besieged  by 
Antonius.  101.  Envoys  sent  .o  him  by 
tho  senate,  107.  Union  of  the  consuls 
with  Octavius  for  his  relief,  1 15.  Relieved 
by  the  retreat  of  the  Antonians,  123.  But 
lannot  pursue  them  for  want  of  cavalry 


and  money,  125.  Crosses  the  Alps,  and 
joins  Plancus  with  ten  legions,  127.  Re- 
crosses the  Alps,  and  is  deserted  by  his 
soldiers,  135.  Taken  and  slain,  136. 

Brutus,  M.  Junius,  Caesar’s  lieutenant  in 
Spain,  accompanies  his  uncle  Cato  to  Cy- 
prus, i.  311.  His  family  and  character, 
812,313;  ii.  376.  Idle  rumour  of  his  being 
Caesar’s  son  by  Servilia,  i.  312.  His  devo- 
tion to  Cato,  ii.  193.  Joins  the  Pompeians 
at  Thessalonica,  193.  Surrenders  after 
Pharsalia,  and  is  taken  into  Caesar’s  favour, 
239.  Ciesar’s  remark  on  him,  240.  Ap- 
pointed praetor,  366.  Governs  Cisalpine 
Gaul,  281.  His  weakness  and  inconsist- 
ency, 376.  His  panegyric  of  Cato,  377. 
Divorces  Claudia,  and  marries  Porcia,  Ca- 
to’s daughter,  377.  Induced  to  lead  the 
conspiracy  against  Caesar,  378.  The  u Ides 
of  March,”  383.  His  speech  to  the  people, 
iii.  9.  Refuses  to  put  Antonius  to  death. 
12.  His  mistaken  views,  13.  Harangues 
the  people,  but  is  coldly  received,  18. 
Returns  to  the  Capitol,  18,  28.  Again  har- 
angues the  people,  28,  29.  Character  of 
his  oratory.  30.  Appointed  to  the  gov- 
ernment of  Macedonia,  81.  Overrules 
Cassius  in  his  opposition  to  the  public 
funeral  of  Caesar,  32.  His  house  attacked, 
he  flies  from  Rome,  41,  42.  Returns  to 
Rome,  but  shrinks  from  public  affairs,  65. 
Escapes  to  Lanuvium,  66.  Lingers  in  the 
neighbourhood  of  Rome,  67.  Deprived  of 
his  government  of  Macedonia  by  An  to 
nius,  and  appointed  to  the  charge  of  pro- 
viding corn  for  the  city,  69.  His  inter- 
view with  Cicero,  at  Antium,  70.  Ilis 
vacillation,  71.  Exhibits  the  Ludi  Apoli- 
nares,  as  city  praator,  73.  Obtains  leave 
of  absence  from  Rome,  81.  Quits  Italy 
for  the  East,  94.  Acknowledged  by  Hor- 
tensius  as  his  successor  in  Macedonia, 
109.  Shuts  up  C.  Antonius  in  Apollonia, 
109.  Prosecuted  by  Cornificius  for  the 
murder  of  Ca?sar,  and  condemned,  133. 
Seizes  the  government  of  Macedonia,  158. 
Defeats  C.  Antonius,  but  spares  his  life, 

158.  Exercises  his  troops  in  Macedonia, 
and  coins  money  with  his  own  effigy, 

159.  Musters  eight  legions,  159.  Joins 
Cassius  at  Philippi,  161.  Rebuked  by  Cas- 
sius, 165.  Storms  the  camp  of  Octavius, 
167.  Compelled  to  fight  a second  time  by 
his  soldiers,  is  defeated,  and  kills  himself, 
169. 

Building,  considerations  on  the  taste  of  tho 
Romans  in,  &c.,  vii.  271. 

Burdo,  Julius,  chief  of  the  galleys,  rescued 
by  Yitellius,  vi.  321. 

Burrhus,  Afranius,  praetorian  prefect,  v 419 
Introduces  Nero  to  the  guards,  458 . vi. 
62.  His  alliance  with  Seneca,  68.  Tln*ir 
influence  on  Nero,  70.  73.  Suspected  by 
Nero,  80.  Reassures  him,  80.  The  w Quin- 
quennium Neronis,”  the  work  of  Burrhus 
and  Seneca,  84,  94.  They  uphold  the 
senate,  91.  Uncertain  whether  Burrhus 
assented  to  the  murder  of  Agrippina,  102, 
106.  His  death,  and  its  effect  on  the  posi- 
tion of  Seneca,  117, 118. 

Byzantium  deprived  by  Vespasian  of  it* 
autonomy,  vii  23. 


INDEX. 


511 


n iECINi,  ALLIENUS,  urges  Yitellius  to 

Ij  seize  the  empire,  yi.  318.  Advanced  by 
Galba  to  the  command  of  a legion,  318. 
Ilis  march  over  the  Great  St  Bernard, 
823.  Takes  Aventicum,  and  puts  to  death 
the  Helvetian  chfrf,  Julius  Alpinulus, 
823.  In  the  Cisalpine,  331.  Repulsed  be- 
fore Placentia,  332.  Awaits  the  arrival 
of  Yalens,  332.  Throws  a bridge  across 
the  Po,  834.  Permits  his  troops  to  plun- 
der the  Italian  cities,  339.  Meets  Yitellius 
at  Lug  dunum,  340.  He  and  Yalens  the 
real  governors  of  Rome,  353.  Sent  to  the 
north  of  Italy,  356.  Suspected  of  treach- 
ery, and  jealous  of  Yalens,  356.  His  feeble 
conduct  resented  by  the  soldiers,  357. 
Contends  in  a sham  fight  with  Titus,  vii. 
37. 

Cxecina,  Aulus,  legate  on  the  Rhine,  mastery 
obtained  over  him  by  the  mutinous 
troops,  v.  30.  Defeats  the  Bructeri,  33. 

Csecina  Severus  A , defeats  the  Pannonian 
chief  Bato,  iv.  247.  Intercepted  by  the 
Pannonians  on  his  march  from  Maesia  to 
join  Germanicus,  254. 

Cselian  Hill,  the,  described,  iv.  377.  Great 
fire  on  the,  v.  21. 

Ctelius,  his  dancing  accomplishments,  i.  84. 

Caelius,  Rufus  M.,  advocates  the  cause  of 
Caesar,  ii.  201.  His  intrigues,  insurrec- 
tion, and  death,  201-203. 

Caepio,  Fanni us,  forms  a conspiracy  against 
the  life  of  Augustus,  iii.  367 ; iv.  134. 

Caepio,  Servilius,  defeated  by  the  Cimbri, 
i.  203.  Gives  Tolosa  up  to  plunder,  207. 

Caeresi.  a German  tribe,  i.  225.  Join  the 
Belgic  confederacy,  267. 

Caerleon,  city  of,  in  Britain,  vi.  40. 

Caesar,  derivations  of  the  cognomen,  i.  91, 
note  'K  The  name  of  Caesar  as  a sovereign 
title,  iii.  333. 

Jaesar,  Caius  Julius,  i.  90.  His  parentage, 
and  connection  with  Marius,  91.  Inherits 
from  his  uncle  Marius  the  leadership  of 
the  popular  party,  92.  Comprehensive- 
ness of  his  views,  93.  Refuses  to  divorce 
his  wife  Cornelia  at  the  command  of  Sul- 
la, 93.  Compelled  to  leave  Rome,  94. 
Seized  by  Cornelius  Phagita,  94.  Under- 
takes the  patronage  of  the  popular  cause, 
95.  Learns  the  first  rudiments  of  warfare 
at  the  siege  of  Mytilene,  95.  Abstains 
from  joining  the  movement  of  Lepidus,  96. 
Undertakes  the  impeachment  of  Dolabel- 
la,  96.  And  of  C.  Antonius,  uncle  of  the 
triumvir,  96.  Studies  rhetoric  at  Rhodes, 
97.  Captured  by  Cilician  pirates,  98.  His 
vengeance,  98.  'Enters  the  arena  of  pub- 
lic honours,  99.  Pushed  forward  by  the 
zealous  efforts  of  his  party,  100.  Ap- 
pointed to  the  military  tribuneship,  100. 
Commencement  of  his  intercourse  with 
Pompeius,  100.  Obtains  the  rehabilita- 
tion of  his  wife’s  brother,  Cornelius  Cin- 
na,  and  other  Marian  exiles,  101.  Style  of 
his  oratory,  101.  Pronounces  a funeral 
oration  in  honour  of  his  aunt  Julia,  101. 
Defies  the  law  of  Sulla,  in  exhibiting;  the 
bust  of  Marius,  101, 104.  Delivers  a fune- 
ral oration  over  his  wife  Cornelia,  101, 
note  *.  Serves  the  office  of  qumstor  in 
Spain,  102.  His  industry  and  vigour  . 


there,  102.  Becomes  asdile,  103.  Mag- 
nificence of  his  shows  and  entertain- 
ments, 103  Connects  himself  by  mar- 
riage with  the  family  of  Pompeius,  103. 
Defends  himself  against  the  attacks  of 
Catulus,  104.  Presses  the  claims  of  the 
republic  to  the  kingdom  of  Egypt,  105. 
Immensity  of  his  debts,  105.  Object  of 
the  LexPapia  de  Per egrinis,  105.  Cae- 
sar’s preceedings  against  Sulla’s  agents  in 
the  proscription,  106.  Presides  at  the 
trial  of  the  senator  Rabirius,  107.  Prose- 
cutes C.  Calpurnius  Piso,  112.  Obtains 
the  office  tf  Pontifex  Maximus,  113.  En- 
deavours of  the  nobles  to  implicate  him 
in  Catilina’s  conspiracy,  114.  Failure  of 
their  attempts,  120.  Narrowly  escapes 
being  murdered  by  Cicero’s  attendants, 
12*4.  Hailed  as  the  only  man  who  could 
fulfil  the  demands  of  the  crisis,  128. 
Elected  prador,  134.  Proposes  to  de- 
prive Catulus  of  the  honour  of  restoring 
the  Capitol,  135.  Becomes  the  counsellor 
and  confidant  of  the  tribune  Nepos,  142. 
Scene  in  the  Forum,  143.  Deprived  of 
his  tribuneship  by  the  senate,  143.  Fail- 
ure of  a charge  of  implication  in  a con- 
spiracy against  him,  144.  Protects  the 
Numidian  Masintha  in  defiance  of  the 
senate,  144.  Insults  Juba,  145.  Publicly 
repudiates  his  wife  Pompeia,  148.  Re- 
fuses to  proceed  against  Clodius,  148. 
Assumes  the  government  of  Further 
Spain,  153.  His  private  embarrassments, 
lo4.  Obtains  a loan  of  830  talents  from 
Crassus,  154.  Baffles  the  efforts  of  his 
enemies  to  detain  him  at  home,  154.  Sub- 
jugates the  districts  of  Lusitania  north  of 
the  Tagus,  156.  Takes  Brigantium  in 
Galicia,  156  His  civil  administration, 
157.  Saluted  by  the  army  with  the  title 
of  Imperator,  157.  Pompeius’  overtures 
for  an  alliance  with  Cxesar,  166.  Return 
of  Ctnsar  to  Rome,  166,  167.  Sues  for  the 
consulship  and  relinquishes  the  honour  of 
a triumph,  167.  First  occurrence  of  the 
name  of  Cassar  in  the  letters  of  Cicero,  167. 
The  cabal  of  Pompeius,  Caesar,  and  Cras- 
sus, 169.  Caesar  elected  consul,  170.  Pro- 
poses an  agrarian  law,  171.  Throws  Cato 
into  prison,  but  releases  him,  172.  His 
violent  contest  with  the  nobles,  172.  Car- 
ries his  law  through  with  the  high  hand, 
173.  Plot  to  assassinate  him  and  Pom- 
peius, 174.  Obtains  the  proconsulship  of 
the  two  Gauls  and  Illvricum  for  five 
years,  175.  His  sister  Julia  married  to 
Pompeius,  176.  Marries  Calpurnia,  176 
note1.  Takes  command  of  his  legions, 
176.  Makes  friendly  overtures  to  Cicero, 
181.  His  account  of  the  Gauls,  211.  Lin- 
gers in  the  neighbourhood  of  Pome  in  the 
beginning  of  the  year  n.o.  58.  Hastily 
ieaves  Italy,  and  reaches  his  army  on  the 
Rhone,  242.  Prevents  the  Helvetii  from 
crossing  the  river  at  Geneva,  244.  In- 
creases his  levies  and  follows  them  into 
the  territory  of  the  JSdui,  246.  Overtakes 
the  Tigurini  and  defeats  them,  248.  Re- 
fuses to  negotiate  with  the  Helvetii,  248. 
Spares  the  life  of  Dumnorix,  250.  Eu* 
i gages  the  Helvetii  in  a decisive  battle,  and 


512 


INDEX. 


entirely  defeats  them,  251.  Compels  them 
to  return  to  their  own  country,  253.  Es- 
ouses  the  cause  of  the  Gauls  against  the 
uevi,  255.  Proposes  terms,  which  are 
refused  by  Ariovistvis,  255.  Commences 
hostilities,  257.  Arrests  a panic  in  his 
army,  257,  258.  His  fruitless  conference 
with  Ariovistus,  258,  259.  Defeats  the 
Suevi,  and  compels  them  to  cross  the 
Rhine,  261.  Winters  in  the  Hither  Gaul, 
262.  Composition  of  his  legions,  263. 
Military  reputation  acquired  by" his  troops, 
264.  List  of  his  officers,  264  note  >.  Hur- 
ries back  to  Gaul,  268.  Takes  the  Remi 
under  Roman  protection,  268.  Com- 
mencement of  the  second  campaign  in 
Gaul,  268.  Defeats  the  Belgians  with 
great  slaughter,  270.  Reduces  the  Sues- 
siones  and  Bellovaci,  270,  271.  Marches 
against  the  Nervii  and  their  allies,  272. 
His  camp  carried  by  storm  by  the  Nervii, 

274,  275.  Imminent  danger  of  his  army, 

275.  Routs  the  Nervii  and  almost  de- 
6tro}rs  their  nation,  277.  Sends  P.  Crassus 
to  compel  submission  from  the  tribes  on 
the  north-west  of  Gaul,  281.  Winters 
again  in  Italy,  282.  Returns  to  Gaul,  and 
hastens  to  attack  the  Veneti  with  a naval 
force,  290.  Victory  of  the  Romans  over 
the  Veneti,  292.  Caesar  chastises  the  Mo- 
riui  and  Menapii,  297.  Leaves  his  army 
in  winter  quarters  and  returns  to  Italy, 
297.  His  critical  position  under  a threat 
of  recall  from  his  province,  331.  Arrives 
at  Lucca,  and  is  waited  upon  by  great 
numbers  of  senators  and  knights,  332. 
Effects  of  his  bribery  and  caresses,  333. 
Meeting  of  the  triumvirs  at  Lucca,  333. 
Caesar  defended  by  Cicero  in  his  speech 
“ de  Provinciis  Consulaributt 336. 
Jealousy  of  Caesar’s  adherents  at  the 
passing  of  the  law  of  C.  Trebonius,  341. 
Law  for  the  prolongation  of  Caesar’s  com- 
mand opposed  by  the  senate,  but  carried 
by  popular  violence,  342,  343.  Death  of 
his  daughter  Julia,  wife  of  Pompeius,  362. 
His  fourth  campaign,  365.  Meets  the 
invading  tribes  of  the  Usipetes  and  the 
Tenctheri,  367.  Confers  with  the  inva- 
ders, 368.  Defeats  the  Germans  near  the 
Rhine,  371.  Treachery  imputed  to  him 
in  the  senate,  372.  Cato  proposes  he 
should  be  delivered  to  the  enemy,  372. 
Credibility  of  Caesar’s  account  of  the  cam- 
paign, 372,  373.  Proposes  to  make  an 
iucuision  into  Germany,  373.  His  bridge 
across  the  line  near  Coblentz,  374.  In- 
quires into  the  character  and  condition  of 
the  Britcns,  375.  Prepares  to  invade  Bri- 
tain, 378.  Crosses  the  straits  to  Dover, 
379.  Effects  a landing,  380.  His  fleet  in- 
jured by  a high  tide,  3S1.  His  army  har- 
assed by  the  Britons,  382.  Returns  to 
Gaul  before  the  equinox,  383.  Despatches 
Sabinus  and  Cotta  to  make  an  incursion 
into  the  country  of  the  Menapii,  383. 
Goes  into  Illyricum,  384.  Settles  the 
affairs  of  the  Treviri,  384.  His  prepara- 
tions for  a second  invasion  of  Britain,  385. 
In  which  he  lands  again,  386.  Forms  his 
famous  camp  at  Butupiae,  or  Richborough, 
&86.  Defeats  the  Britons  under  Cassive- 


imnns,  387.  Accepts  their  promise  of 
tribute  and  returns  to  Gaul,  389.  Dis* 
tributes  his  forces  over  too  wide  a surface, 
391.  Stations  himself  at  Samarobriva,  391, 
396.  Revolt  of  the  Belgians,  391.  Two 
of  his  legions  destroyed  by  the  Eburones, 
893.  Relieves  Q.  Cicero,  396.  Remains 
in  the  north  of  Gaul  during  the  winter, 
896.  Makes  great  additionallevies  for  his 
sixth  campaign,  and  borrows  a legion 
from  Pompeius.  398.  Chastises  the  Tre- 
viri and  Menapii,  and  crosses  the  Rhine, 
399.  Offers  the  plunder  of  the  Eburones 
to  the  neighbouring  tribes,  400.  His  un- 
successful pursuit  of  Ambiorix,  400,  404. 
Convenes  the  general  assembly  at  Duro- 
cortorum,  and  leaves  Gaul  for  Italy,  405. 
His  alliance  with  Pompeius  dissolved  by 
the  death  of  Julia,  437.  Arrives  at  Lucca, 
and  watches  the  progress  of  events  at 
Rome,  437 ; ii.  7.  His  seventh  campaign 
in  Gaul,  7.  His  lenient  policy  towards  the 
conquered  states  of  Gaul,  8.  Favourable 
disposition  of  the  Gaulish  democracies 
towards  him,  9.  Lavishes  the  treasures 
of  the  republic  on  his  dependants  and  in 
decorating  Rome,  10.  Exultation  of  the 
people  at  his  victories,  11.  Formation  of 
a Gaulish  confederacy  under  Vercingeto- 
rix,  12.  Caesar’s  energy  and  decision  in 
meeting  the  danger,  14.  Besieges  and 
takes  Avaricum,  17,18.  Enters  the  coun- 
try of  the  Arverni  and  lays  siege  to  Ger- 
govia,  20.  Defeated  there,  23.  Fords  the 
Loire,  25.  Joins  Labienus  at  Agendicum, 
25.  His  personal  danger  in  a battle  with 
the  Gauls,  28.  Compels  Vercingetorix  to 
surrender  himself,  33.  His  eighth  and 
last  campaign,  35.  Crushes  the  Bituriges, 
35.  Defeats  and  accepts  the  submission 
of  the  Bellovaci  and  Suessiones,  36.  Re- 
duces Uxellodunum  and  finally  pacifies 
Gaul,  37.  His  severity  to  the  captured 
Gauls,  37.  Unfairness  of  Pompeius  to- 
wards him,  48.  His  critical  position,  48, 
49.  Intrigues  to  be  permitted  to  stand 
for  the  consulship  while  still  absent  from 
the  city,  49.  Endeavours  of  his  enemies 
to  deprive  him  of  his  consulship,  59. 
Pompeius  supports  a decree  of  M.  Mar- 
cellus  aimed  directly  at  Caesar,  60.  Caesai 
offers  to  resign  the  Transalpine  and  Illy 
ricum,  61.  Insulted  by  M.  Marcellus,  61. 
His  supposed  peril  in  Gaul,  63.  His  mild 
and  conciliatory  treatment  of  the  Gauls, 
65.  Conciliates  the  adherents  of  the  sen- 
ate in  the  province,  67.  Attaches  to 
himself  the  military  spirit  of  the  Gauls, 
68.  Composition  of  his  legions,  68.  Sur- 
renders one  of  his  legions  at  the  demand 
of  the  senate,  73.  His  triumphant  recep- 
tion in  the  Cisalpine  province,  76.  En- 
thusiasm of  his  veterans,  77.  Leaves 
Labienus  to  administer  the  Cisalpine  prov- 
ince, 77.  Stations  himself  at  Ravenna, 
whither  Curio  betakes  himself,  77,  73. 
Sends  Curio  to  Rome  with  the  offer  of  & 
compromise,  80.  Refusal  of  his  offers  by 
the  senate,  who  require  him  to  resign  his 
command,  81.  Preparations  of  the  con- 
suls to  oppose  Caesars  measures  by  force 
83.  The  consuls  reviow  their  forces,  84. 


INDEX. 


513 


Gffisar  harangues  his  troops,  proclaims  his 
wrongs,  and  prepares  to  invade  Italy,  88, 
89.  Crosses  the  Rubicon,  91.  Occupies 
Ariminum,  91.  Effect  of  the  calumnies 
against  him,  94.  Pompeius  negotiates 
with  him  to  gain  time,  98.  Defection  of 
Labienus,  99.  Ciesar  advances  and  takes 
Iguvium,  Arretium,  and  Auximum,  100. 
His  band  of  gladiators  at  Capua  broken 
up,  102.  Overruns  Picenum,  and  takes  the 
forces  of  Cingulum  and  Asculum,  103. 
Beleaguers  Corfinium,  which  is  betrayed 
into  his  hands,  104.  Grants  life  and 
liberty  to  Domitius  and  the  Pompeian 
leaders,  105, 106.  Effects  of  this  clemen- 
cy, 106.  Besieges  Pompeius  in  Brun- 
disium,  108.  Rapidity  of  his  success,  110. 
Expels  the  forces  of  the  senate  from  Sar- 
dinia and  Sicily,  121.  Repairs  in  person 
to  Rome,  122.  Has  an  interview  with 
Cicero  on  the  way,  122.  Convenes  a sen- 
ate, supported  by  the  tribunes  Antonins 
and  Cassius,  123.  His  studious  modera- 
tion, 123.  liis  difficulty  in  satisfying  the 
demands  of  his  soldiers,  124.  Plunders 
the  sacred  treasure  in  the  temple  of  Saturn, 
125.  Leaves  Rome  to  attack  the  Pom- 
peians in  Spain,  127.  Leaves  his  lieuten- 
ants to  reduce  Massilia  and  hastens  into 
Spain,  129.  His  arrangements,  130.  Pre- 
parations of  the  Pompeians  to  meet  him 
in  the  field,  131.  Caesar  follows  his  lieu- 
tenant Fabius  to  the  valley  of  the  Sicoris, 
134.  Entrenches  his  camp  in  front  of  the 
enemy’s  position,  135.  Manoeuvres  of  the 
hostile  armies,  137.  Each  side  claims  the 
advantage,  139.  Caesar's  position  hem- 
med in  by  a sudden  rise  of  the  waters,  140. 
His  reinforcements  rest  on  the  further  side 
of  the  river,  141.  Restores  his  communi- 
cations by  the  use  of  coracles,  142.  His 
lieutenant  D.  Brutus,  gains  a victory  over 
the  Massilians  at  sea,  143.  Preparations 
of  the  Afranians  to  evacuate  llerda,  144. 
Ciesar’s  operations  to  prevent  their  re- 
treat, 144.  Makes  a feint,  and  moves  to 
intercept  the  march  of  the  enemy,  148. 
Comes  up  with  the  Afranians,  but  refuses 
to  engage  them,  148.  Communications 
opened  between  the  soldiers  in  the  oppo- 
site ranks,  150.  This  intercourse  broken 
off  by  Setreius,  151.  The  armies  drawn 
up  in  front  of  each  other  in  battle  array, 

152.  Capitulation  of  the  Pompeian  lieuten- 
ants, 152.  Caesar’s  generosity  to  them, 

153.  Establishes  his  neadquarters  at  Cor- 
duba,  160.  Receives  the  submission  of 
Yarro,  162.  Arranges  the  affairs  of  Spain, 
and  repairs  to  Massilia,  163.  Causes  of 
the  hostility  of  Juba,  King  of  Nil  midi  a, 
to  Caesar,  164.  Curio  and  the  Caesarians 
in  Africa  defeated  by  Juba,  166, 167.  Sus- 
tains a heavy  loss  in  a naval  engagement 
off  Illyricum,  169.  Receives  the  submis- 
sion of  the  Massilians,  173.  Created  dic- 
tator in  his  absence  from  Rome,  173.  His 
object  in  seeking  the  appointment  at  this 
time,  174.  Quells  a mutiny  among  his 
soldiers  at  Placentia,  176.  Difficulties  of 
his  position  as  dictator,  178.  Confidence 
reposed  in  his  determination  to  resist  the 
sry  for  confiscation  and  blood,  179.  His 


financial  measures,  180.  His  amnesty 
to  the  victims  of  Pompeius  and  Sulla’s 
proscriptions,  182.  Obtains  full  citizen- 
ship for  the  Transpadane  Gauls,  183. 
Elected  consul  with  P.  Servilius  Isauri- 
cus,  184.  Resigns  the  dictatorship  and 
repairs  to  his  army  at  Brundisium,  185, 
195.  Comparison  of  his  position  with  that 
of  his  adversaries,  195.  Crosses  over  to 
Epirus,  195.  Lands  at  Palaeste,  195. 
Sends  Fufius  Calenus  for  the  remainder 
of  his  troops,  197.  Attempt  at  counter 
revolution  in  Rome  and  Italy,  200.  At- 
tempts to  cross  the  Adriatic  in  a violent 
tempest,  203.  His  manoeuvres  to  join  the 
second  division  under  Antonius,  206. 
Blockades  Pompeius  within  his  lines  at 
Petra,  207.  Character  and  authenticity  of 
the  “Commentaries  on  the  Civil  War,” 
attributed  to  Csesar,  208.  Review  of  the 
calculations  on  which  Csesar  planned  his 
operations,  210.  Establishes  communica- 
tions with  iEtolia,  Thessaly,  and  Mace- 
donia, 213.  Occupies  Achaia,  218.  His 
discomfiture,  220.  Moves  towards  Thes- 
saly, 222.  Anticipates  the  various  plans 
the  enemy  may  adopt,  222.  Effects  a 
junction  with  the  division  of  Calvinus  on 
the  frontiers  of  Epirus  and  Thessaly,  223. 
Fixes  his  quarters  in  the  plain  of  Thes- 
saly, 224.  Gives  up  the  town  of  Gomphi 
to  pillage,  224.  Receives  the  submission 
of  Metropolis,  224.  The  battle  of  Pharsa- 
lia  and  defeat  of  Pompeius,  227-230. 
C&sar’s  clemency  to  the  vanquished,  237- 
240.  Takes  M.  Brutus  into  his  favour, 
239.  Follows  up  his  victory,  251.  Pur- 
sues Pompeius,  252.  Compels  C.  Cassius 
to  surrender  his  fleet,  253.  Arrives  in 
Egypt,  253,  254.  His  horror  on  beholding 
the  head  of  Pompeius,  254.  His  object  in 
interfering  in  the  affairs  of  Egypt,  254. 
His  first  interview  with  Cleopatra,  255. 
His  precarious  position,  256.  Rising  of 
the  Alexandrians  against  him,  258.  Burns 
the  Egyptian  fleet,  259.  Puts  Pothinus  to 
death,  260.  Blockaded  at  Alexandria,  260. 
Compelled  to  swim  for  his  life,  261.  Re- 
stores Ptolemaeus  to  his  subjects,  262. 
Attacked  by  Ptolemaeus,  262.  Joined  by 
Mithridates,  king  of  Pergamus,  and  de- 
feats Ptolemaeus  at  the  battle  of  the  Nile, 
262,  263.  Misconduct  of  Caesar’s  lieuten- 
ant in  Spain,  Q.  Cassius  Longinus,  267. 
Vigilance  of  his  colleague  Servilius  in 
Rome,  269.  Honours  heaped  upon  Caesar 
by  the  people,  269.  Created  dictator  for 
one  year,  270.  Appoints  Antonius  his 
master  of  the  horse,  270.  Disaffection  of 
his  veterans  in  Italy,  271.  Advances  to 
encounter  Pharnaces,  and  defeats  him  in 
the  battle  of  Zela,  271,  272.  Corruption  of 
character  by  his  intercourse  with  Cleopa- 
tra, 273.  Arrives  at  Rome,  276.  Submis- 
sion of  the  nobles  to  him,  277.  His  firm- 
ness in  protecting  them  against  the 
cupidity  of  his  own  party,  278.  Confis- 
cates the  estates  of  Pompeius  and  of  his 
two  sons,  279.  His  policy  in  securing  the 
services  of  men  of  all  parties,  279.  Re- 
stores the  statues  of  Sulla  and  Pompeius, 
2S1.  Assumes  the  dictatorship  for  the 


514 


INDEX. 


third  time,  281.  Designates  himself  and 
Lepidus  consuls,  281.  Quells  a mutiny 
among  his  soldiers,  2S2.  Leaves  Italy  and 
lands  in  Africa,  290.  Repulsed  at  Adru- 
metum,  291.  Received  at  Leptis,  but 
worsted  in  an  engagement,  291.  Obtains 
an  advantage  over  Scipio,  293.  Invests 
Thapsus,  294.  Defeats  Scipio  at  the  bat- 
tle of  Thapsus,  295.  Exacts  large  sums 
from  the  conquered  cities,  303.  Sails  for 
Sardinia  and  enforces  payment  of  a large 
sum  from  the  inhabitants,  304.  Reaches 
Rome,  305.  Honours  showered  upon  him 
during  his  absence,  306.  Appointed  dic- 
tator for  ten  years,  307.  Celebration  of 
his  four  triumphs,  308.  Distributes  lar- 
gesses to  the  soldiers  and  people,  311. 
Exhibits  gladiatorial  shows,  312.  Defeats 
the  republicans  at  the  battle  of  Mundi, 
816, 317.  General  view  of  the  spirit  of  his 
legislation,  319.  His  sumptuary  laws, 
324.  Abridges  the  consuls1  term  of  office 
arbitrarily,  and  increases  the  number  of 
the  senate,  325.  Communicates  the  Ro- 
man franchise  to  the  provincials,  326. 
Assigns  lands  to  the  veterans,  328.  At- 
tempts to  counteract  the  increase  of  slave 
labour  in  Italy,  329.  Th ejustrium  libero- 
rutn , 330.  Confines  the  judicia  to  the  sena- 
torial and  equestrian  orders,  331.  Dis- 
solves the  collegia , 333.  His  favour  to 
the  Jews,  333.  His  project  of  a complete 
code  of  laws,  and  of  a complete  map  of  the 
empire,  333,  334.  Establishes  the  first 
public  library  in  Rome,  335.  Reforms 
the  calendar,  339.  Begins  to  assume  re- 
gal state,  340.  Visit  of  Cleopatra  to 
Rome,  341.  Her  son  Caesarian,  341. 
Caesar’s  conduct  and  adulation  of  the  no- 
bles, 342,  343.  The  general  feeling  of  the 
nation  favourable  to  his  power,  344. 
Tranquillity  of  Rome  during  his  absence 
in  Spain,  346.  His  personal  friends,  348. 
Their  Epicurean  tenets,  852.  Himself  a 
professed  unbeliever,  314.  His  addiction 
to  superstition,  354.  News  of  the  victory  of 
Munda  reaches  Rome,  355.  Decrees  passed 
in  his  honour,  356.  Returns  to  Rome, 
and  celebrates  his  last  triumph,  357.  Re- 
ceives the  appellation  of  father  of  his 
country  and  other  honours,  358.  Offends 
the  senators,  360.  Caesar’s  urbanity,  361. 
Visits  Cicero  at  Puteoli,  361.  Schemes  of 
conquest  attributed  to  him,  364.  His  fifth 
consulship,  365.  Adopts  C.  Octavius  as 
his  heir,  366.  Saluted  by  the  title  of  king, 
370.  Rejects  a royal  diadem  offered  to 
him  by  Antonius,  371.  Proposal  to  obtain 
a decree  conferring  upon  him  the  title  of 
king  of  the  foreign  subjects  of  the  com- 
monwealth, 373.  Formation  of  a con- 
spiracy against  his  life,  373  Preparations 
of  the  conspirators  to  execute  their  design, 
830.  Csesar  enters  the  senate  house,  382. 
Assassinated,  383, 384.  Reflections  on  his 
death,  3S5.  Judgment  of  the  ancients  on 
his  assassination,  386.  His  person,  charac- 
ter, and  abilities,  388-393.  His  body  car- 
ried to  his  pontifical  mansion,  iii.  10.  His 
papers  and  treasures  removed  to  the  house 
of  Antonius,  15.  His  will,  32.  His  pub- 
lic funeral,  36.  His  apotheosis,  65.  Place 


of  his  cremation,  315.  His  assumption  oi 
the  preenonten  imperatoris , 848.  His 
usurpation  of  the  office  of  consul,  358. 
Contrast  between  the  position  of  Caesar 
and  Pompeius  with  respect  to  the  su- 
preme power,  427. 

Caesar,  Caius,  son  of  Agrippa  and  Julia, 
adopted  by  Augustus,  iv.  155.  Introduced 
to  public  life,  190,  192.  His  education, 
205.  Assumes  the  gown  of  manhood,  208. 
Receives  the  title  of  prince  of  the  Roman 
youth,  209.  Sent  to  the  East,  213.  His 
interview  with  Tiberius  at  Samos,  214. 
Confirms  Herod’s  will,  215.  Denounces 
Lollius,  217.  Compels  Pliraates  the  Par- 
thian to  submit  to  Rome,  217,  218. 
"Wounded  at  Artigira,  218.  His  illness 
and  death  at  Limyra,  218,  219. 

Caesar,  Caius  [Caligula],  affection  of  his 
uncle  Drusus  for  him,  v.  166.  Pronounces 
the  funeral  oration  over  the  body  of  the 
empress  Livia,  211.  Retained  by  Tiberius 
about  his  own  person  at  Caprete,  216,  236. 
Advanced  to  the  priesthood  by  Tiberius, 
221.  Married  to  a daughter  of  M.  Junius 
Silanus,  236,  252.  Advanced  to  the  quaes- 
torship,  249.  His  birth  and  childhood 
assed  in  the  Rhenish  camp,  251.  Named 
y Tiberius  joint  heir  with  his  grandson 
Gemellus,  250.  Remark  of  Pasiennus  on 
his  character,  252.  Death  of  his  wife,  252. 
Macro’s  ascendancy  over  him,  252.  His 
intrigues  with  Ennia  and  prophecy  of 
Tiberius,  255.  Influence  of  Herod  Agrip- 
pa over  him,  277-281.  Unsound  in  body 
and  mind,  282.  Conducts  the  obsequies 
of  Tiberius,  287.  His  nickname  of  Cali- 
gula, 286  note  3.  His  accession  and  liberal 
conduct,  288.  His  first  consulship,  his 
devotion  to  business,  and  dissipation,  292- 
295.  Despair  of  the  people  at  his  sickness 
at  Rome  and  in  the  provinces,  295,  296. 
Corrupted  by  flattery,  298.  Puts  Tiberius 
Gemellus  to  death,  298.  His  degraded 
manners  and  personal  appearance,  298, 299. 
His  gladiatorial  shows,  300.  Puts  Macro 
and  Ennia  to  death,  301.  His  rapid  suc- 
cession of  executions  and  confiscations, 
304.  His  despair  at  the  death  of  his  sister 
Drusilla,  304.  Marries,  and  shortly  after 
repudiates,  Lollia  Paulina,  306.  Distrib- 
utes crowns  and  sceptres  to  foreign  appli- 
cants, 307.  His  statues  intruded  into 
Jewish  synagogues,  311.  Claims  divine 
worship,  312.  His  claim  resented  with 
indignation  by  the  Jews,  315.  His  inter- 
view with  Philo  and  the  Alexandrian 
Jews,  316-319.  Deficiency  of  our  mate- 
rials for  the  history  of  Caius,  320.  How 
Tacitus  would  have  painted  the  Emperor 
Caius,  322.  Possibly  misrepresented,  323. 
His  early  disadvantages,  323—326.  Strango 
story  of  the  priesthood  of  the  Arician 
Diana,  326.  Caius  imbibes  a notion  of  his 
own  superior  nature,  328.  His  colossal 
conceptions  in  public  works : his  palace, 
his  viaduct  across  the  Yelabrum,  and  bis 
bridge  across  the  Bay  of  Baia>,  329-335. 
Affects  to  be  an  orator,  337.  His  spite 
against  the  insignia  of  the  nobles,  837. 
Really  believes  himself  divine,  338.  His 
bantering  humour  and  persecution  of  the 


INDEX. 


515 


nobles,  340-342.  Massacre  of  the  exiled 
nobles,  343.  His  unpopular  taxation,  344 
His  well-known  exclamation  respecting 
the  Roman  people,  345.  His  expedition 
against  the  Germans,  346-348.  His  im- 
perial auction  at  Lugdunum,  349.  Dis- 
covery of  a conspiracy  in  Gaul;  Caius’s 
sisters  disgraced  and  Lepidus  and  Guetu- 
licus  executed,  350.  His  marriage  with 
Milonia  Cmsonia,  352.  Assumes  a third 
consulship,  and  resigns  on  the  twelfth 
day,  352.  Puts  Ptolemaeus  of  Mauretania 
to  death,  353.  His  “British  expedition,” 
354.  Avows  himself  a tyrant,  358.  De- 
tection of  a conspiracy  against  him,  359. 
His  crowning  act  of  extravagance,  360. 
Conspiracy  of  Cassius  Chaerea,  361.  As- 
sassinated by  Cknerea,  362.  His  ashes 
honoured  by  his  sistera,  363. 

Caesar,  L.  Julius,  the  consul,  his  concession 
of  the  franchise  to  the  Italians,  i.  91.  note 3. 
Sits  with  his  kinsman  Julius  on  the  trial 
of  Rabirius,  107.  Shrinks  from  declaring 
Antonius  a public  enemy,  iii.  107.  Pro- 
scribed by  the  triumvirs,  140. 

Caesar,  L.  (son  of  the  last)  sent  by  Pompeius 
to  negotiate  with  Caesar,  ii.  98.  Pardoned 
by  Caesar,  303. 

Caesar,  Lucius  Julius,  son  of  Agrippa  and 
Julia,  adopted  by  Augustus,  iv.  155.  His 
education,  205.  Receives  the  title  of 
prince  of  the  Roman  youth,  209.  Sent  on 
a mission  to  Spain,  but  dies  at  Massilia, 
217.  Tiberius’s  elegy  on  his  death,  236. 

Caesar,  Sextus,  governs  Syria  for  C;esar,  ii. 
318.  Murdered  by  the  Pompeians,  318. 
Protects  Herod,  iii.  302. 

Caesarea,  foundation  of  the  city  of,  by  Herod, 
iv.  163. 

Caesarion,  reputed  son  of  Caesar  and  Cleo- 
patra, ii.  342;  iii.  33.  Proclaimed  joint 
monarch  of  Egypt  by  Antonius,  226.  Put 
to  death  by  Augustus,  271. 

M Caesars,  Lives  of  the,”  of  Suetonius,  vii. 
248. 

Caesonia,  Milonia,  married  to  the  emperor 
Caius,  v.  352.  His  affection  for  her,  361. 
Her  death,  366. 

Caesetius,  Flavius  L.,  tribune,  removes  the 
garland  and  diadem  from  Caesar’s  statue, 
ii.  370.  Brutus  demands  his  recall  from 
banishment,  iii.  18. 

Caieta  sacked  by  the  Cilician  pirates,  i.  47 
note. 

Calatia,  settlement  of  the  Roman  colony  of, 
ii.  329. 

Calendar,  the  Roman,  confusion  of,  ii.  336. 
Amount  of  error  in  the  computation  of 
time,  338.  Reformed  by  Caesar,  339. 

Calenus,  Fufius,  a Caesarian,  sent  by  Caesar 
to  Brundisium,  ii.  197.  Commands  in 
Achaia,  drives  the  Pompeians  from  that 
province,  ii.  217.  Compels  Athens  to  sub- 
mit to  Caesar,  and  occupies  the  Pelopon- 
nesus, 252.  Consul  n.o.  47,  280.  Ilis  pro- 
posal to  treat  with  Antonius,  iii.  102, 104 
Opposes  Cicero’s  motion  to  declare  M. 
Antonius  an  enemy  of  the  state,  107. 
Supports  Antonius,  111.  And  promises 
aid  to  L.  Antonius,  179.  His  death,  181. 

Caletes,  a Belgian  tribe,  join  the  confederacy 
against  the  Romans,  i.  267. 


Caligula,  See  Caesar,  Caius. 

Cal  laid,  a Spanish  tribe,  i.  155. 

Callistus,  freedman  of  Caius,  cunspirea 
against  him,  v.  359. 

Calpurnia,  daughter  of  L.  Calpurnius  Pi  so, 
married  to  Caesar,  i.  176.  Receives  her 
husband’s  dead  body,  iii.  14  Removes 
his  treasure  and  papers  to  the  house  of 
Antonius,  15. 

Calpurnian  family,  their  pride  and  antago- 
nism to  the  Caisarian,  v.  59. 

Calpurnius  Crassus,  conspires  against  Nerva 
and  is  banished,  vii.  167. 

Calvena,  C.  Matius,  his  friendship  with 
Caesar,  ii.  351. 

Calvinus,  his  wars  against  the  Yocontii,  i. 
196. 

Calvinus,  Cn.  Domitius,  consul  in  b.o.  52,  i. 
433,  434.  Commands  the  Cesarians  in 
Macedonia,  214,  216,  217.  Forms  a junc- 
tion with  Cresar  in  Thessaly,  223.  Sum- 
moned by  him  to  Alexandria,  356.  At- 
tacks and  is  defeated  by  Pharnaces,  265. 
Named  master  of  the  horse,  366. 

Calvisius  Sabinus,  C.,  commands  the  Caesar- 
ians in  ACtolia,  ii.  214.  Takes  command 
of  a fleet  for  Octavius,  iii.  194.  Defeated 
by  the  Pompeians  under  Menecrates,  194. 

Camels  of  Bactria  and  Arabia,  ii.  285.  Not 
known  in  Africa,  West  of  Egypt,  at  tho 
time  of  Caesar,  285. 

Camelus,  the  Gaulish  chieftain,  puts  D. 
Brutus  to  death,  iii.  135. 

Camillus,  Furius,  proconsul  of  Africa,  de- 
feats Tacfarinas,  v.  57.  Claims  the  hon- 
ours of  a conqueror,  57. 

Campania,  admitted  to  the  Latin  franchise, 
i.  24.  Principal  cities,  of,  sacked  by  Spar- 
tacus,  51.  The  defence  of  the  Campanian 
coast  placed  in  the  hands  of  Cicero,  ii.  86. 
Lands  in  Campania  assf^ned  to  the  vete- 
rans, iii.  52.  The  life  of  the  Romans  on 
the  Campanian  coast,  iv.  363.  Ravaged 
by  storms  and  pestilence,  vi.  160. 

Camps,  fortified,  of  the  Romans,  vii.  445. 

Campus  Agrippce,  iv.  387. 

Campus  Esquilinus,  charnel  field  of  the,  iv. 
199. 

Campus  Martius,  described,  iv.  385-3S7. 
Athletic  contests  in  the,  422. 

Campus  Raudius,  battle  of  the,  i.  206. 

Camul,  or  Hesus,  a Gaulish  deity,  identified 
with  Mars,  i.  223 ; iv.  84. 

Camulodunum,  British  city  of,  vi.  17.  De- 
fended by  the  Trinobantes,  24  Taken  by 
Claudius,  25.  Foundation  of  the  military 
colony  of  Camulodunum,  30.  Inaugu- 
ration of  tho  worship  of  Claudius  in,  32. 
Sacked  by  the  Iceni,  46. 

Camulogenus,  king  of  the  JEdui,  defeated  by 
the  Romans,  ii.  26. 

Candace,  queen  of  -Ethiopa,  her  troops 
routed  by  Petronius,  iv.  105.  Her  high 
spirit,  105.  Sends  envoys  to  Augustus, 
who  releases  her  from  tribute,  105. 

Cangi,  a tribe  in  Carnarvonshire,  attacked 
by  Ostorius  Scapula,  vi.  29. 

Canidius  Crassus,  an  Antonian  officer,  de- 
feats the  Armenians,  iii.  219.  Command! 
the  Antonian  army  at  Actium,  256.  Sur- 
renders to  Octavius,  256.  Put  to  death  by 
him,  272. 


516 


INDEX 


Caninefates,  a German  tribe,  submit  to 
Tiberias,  iv.  237,  266.  Join  the  revolt  of 
Civilis,  vi.  887,  408. 

Cantabri,  the,  in  the  north  of  Spain,  i 155. 
Subdued  by  Augustus,  iv.  89, 161.  And 
by  Agrippa,  137. 

Canutius,  the  tribune,  denounces  M.  Anto- 
nius,  iii.  90. 

Capitation  tax,  the,  iii.  420. 

Capito,  C..  Ateius,  on  the  crime  of  construc- 
tive majesty,  v.  127.  Demands  the  re- 
vival of  charges  of  majesty  in  the  reign 
of  Nero,  vi.  115. 

Capito  Cossntianus,  a delator,  brings  charges 
against  Thrasea,  vi.  167, 168. 

Capito,  Titinius,  his  account  of  the  “ Deaths 
of  Famous  Men,”  vii.  244. 

Capitol,  the,  seized  by  L.  Satnminus,  i.  107. 
Recovered,  107.  Burnt  in  the  time  of 
Sulla,  135.  Restored  and  dedicated  by 
Catulus,  135, 136.  Again  burnt  in  the  civil 
wars,  136;  vi.  366.  Description  of  the 
capitolium  in  the  time  of  Augustus,  iv. 
876.  Decree  for  its  restoration,  vi.  374, 
878.  Restored  by  Vespasian,  vii.  25. 
Burnt  in  the  reign  of  Titus,  49.  Restored 
by  Domitian,  117. 

Capitoline  contests,  established  by  Domi- 
tian, vii.  188. 

Capitoline  Hill,  the,  described,  iv.  875. 

Cappadocia,  attempts  of  Mithridates  to  gain 
possession  of,  l.  42.  On  the  death  of 
Archelaus,  annexed  to  the  Roman  Em- 
pire, v.  51.  269. 

Capreae,  island  of,  retirement  of  Tiberius  in, 

v.  203.  Description  of  204. 

Capua,  proposal  for  drafting  colonies  to,  i. 
110.  Opposed  by  Cicero,  110,  111.  Caesar’s 
band  of  gladiators  at,  broken  up  by  the 
senate,  117. 

Caractacus,  opposes  Aulus  Plautius,  and  is 
worsted,  vi.  22.  Heads  the  Silures,  29. 
His  last  battle  and  defeat.  35  et  seq. 
Brought  before  Claudius  at  Rome,  v.  446; 

vi.  37.  His  speech  to  the  emperor,  37. 
His  life  spared,  3S. 

Carbo,  Papirus,  defeated  by  the  migrating 
Cimbri  and  Teutones,  i.  201. 

Caria,  its  connection  with  Rhodes,  iv.  107. 

Carnuntum,  importance  of  the  station  of,  iv. 
245. 

Camutes,  a Gallic  tribe,  i.  281.  Compelled 
to  submit  to  the  Romans,  282.  Murder 
the  chieftain  Tasgetius,  391.  Revolt 
against  Rome,  ii.  12.  All-powerful  author- 
ity of  the  Druids  among  them,  35. 

Carrhse,  Roman  garrison  at,  i.  425.  Besieged 
by  Surenas,  426. 

Carrinas,  C.,  chosen  consul,  iii  156.  Gains  a 
victory  over  the  Morini,  iv.  70. 

Carrinas  Secundus,  one  of  Nero’s  agents 
in  plundering  Asia  Minor  and  Greece,  vi 
142. 

Carthage,  visited  by  the  Emperor  Hadrian, 

vii.  352. 

Cartismandna,  chieftain  of  the  Silures,  be- 
trays Caractacus  to  the  Romans,  vi.  36. 
Expelled  by  her  subjects,  and  rescued  by 
Didius,  39. 

Da  sea,  Publius,  joins  the  conspiracy  against 
Caesar,  ii  874  The  first  to  strike  at  Cae- 
sar, 383.  j 


Casilinum,  settlement  of  the  colony  cf,  fl 
328,  329. 

Casperius,  -Elian ns,  praetorian  prefect,  mu- 
tinies against  Nerva,  vii.  167. 

Cassinius,  defeated  by  Spartacus,  i.  51. 

Cassius,  Avidius,  his  victory  over  the  Par- 
thians,  vii.  45o.  Popularly  charged  with 
having  caused  the  plague  of  A.  d.166,  461. 
His  treason  against  Aurelius,  469.  Slain 
by  the  legions,  471. 

Cassius,  C.,  commands  a Pompeian  fleet,  ii 
250.  Destroys  a Caesarian  fleet,  250.  Sur- 
renders to  Caesar,  253.  His  Epicurean 
tenets,  352.  Appointed  praetor,  366.  Joins 
the  conspiracy  against  Caesar’s  life,  874 
His  character,  375.  His  talents  as  a 
statesman  and  general,  iii.  26.  Enter- 
tained by  Antonius,  30.  Obtains  the  gov- 
ernment of  Syria,  81.  In  Rome  on  the 
arrival  of  Octavius,  64.  Shrinks  from 
public  affairs,  and  escapes  to  Lanuvium 
66.  Lingers  in  the  neighbourhood  of 
Rome,  67.  His  interview  with  Cicero  at 
Antium,  70.  Obtains  leave  of  absence 
from  Rome,  81.  Quits  Italy  for  the  East, 
94.  Gathers  together  an  imposing  force, 
109.  Gains  some  advantage  in  Syria,  109. 
Attacks  Doiabella  in  Laodicea,  and  causes 
him  to  commit  suicide,  128.  Prosecuted 
by  Agrippa  for  the  murder  of  Caesar, 
and  condemned,  138.  Becomes  undis- 
puted master  of  Syria,  159.  His  forces, 
159.-  Chastises  Rhodes.  161.  Unites  with 
Brutus  at  Philippi,  162.  Rebukes  Brutus, 
165.  Defeated  by  Antonius,  167. 

Cassius  Cha/rea,  forms  a conspiracy  against 
the  life  of  the  emperor  Caius,  v.  361. 
Honours  decreed  him  by  the  senate,  366. 
Executed  by  Claudius,  369. 

Cassius  Longinus,  L.,  leads  a Caesarian  army 
into  Thessaly,  ii.  214 

Cassius  Longinus,  Q.,  serves  under  Crassns 
in  Parthia,  i.  417.  Warns  his  leader  ofhis 
perilous  position,  417.  Suggests  the  plan 
of  the  campaign,  420.  Takes  upon  him- 
self to  give  orders,  425.  Checks  the  ag- 
gressions of  the  Parthians,  ii.  56.  Elected 
tribune,  78.  Flees  to  Ravenna,  82.  Con- 
vokes a meeting  of  the  senate,  123.  Placed 
by  Caesar  over  the  three  provinces  of  the 
Spanish  Peninsula,  ii.  163.  Receives  the 
province  of  Further  Spain,  184,  267.  His 
misconduct  there,  267.  Attempt  to  as- 
sassinate him,  267.  Puts  Laterensis  and 
the  conspirators  to  death,  267.  His  death, 
208. 

Cassius  Parmensis,  the  last  survivor  of  Cae- 
sar’s murderers,  in  arms  against  the  tri- 
umvirate, iii.  173.  Clings  to  S.  Pompeius, 
hut  finally  abandons  him,  204  Put  to 
death  by  Octavius,  272. 

Cassius  Longinus,  husband  of  Drusilla, 
v.  249.  His  narrow  escape  from  death, 
362. 

Cassius  Severus,  bis  writings  suppressed  by 
the  senate,  but  restored  to  circulation  by 
Caius  Caesar,  v.  289. 

Cassius  joins  Catilina’s  conspiracy,  i.  116. 
Defeated  and  slain  by  the  Cimbri  and 
Teutones,  202. 

Cassius,  C.,  proscribed  by  Nero,  vi.  157, 

Cassius  Longinus,  entrapped  by  Dec®- 


INDEX. 


517 


balus,  vii.  192.  His  gallantry  and  death, 
193. 

Cassivellaunus,  king  of  the  Tri  noban  tes,  de- 
feated by  C*sar,  i.  357.  Abandoned  by 
his  subjects  and  allies,  he  sues  for  peace, 
389. 

Casticus,  a prince  of  the  Sequani,  won  over 
by  Orgetorix  the  Helvetian,  i.  239. 

Castra  Vetera  (supposed  to  be  Xanten  near 
Cleves),  a station  planted  by  Drusus  on 
the  Lower  Rhine,  vi.  390.  Memmius  Lu- 
percus  takes  refuge  there,  390.  And  is 
leaguered  by  Civilis,  392.  Capitulation 
to,  and  treacherous  massacre  of  the  gar- 
rison by  Civilis,  401.  Defeat  of  Civilis 
and  the  Germans  by  Cerealis  before  Ve- 
tera, 408. 

Catacombs,  theory  respecting  their  original 
tenants,  vii.  2S6  note  >. 

Catilina.  L.  Sergius,  his  character,  i.  114, 

115.  Fails  in  his  suit  for  the  consulship, 

116.  Profligacy  of  his  aims,  116.  His  as- 
sociates and  partisans,  116.  Refuses  to 
agree  to  a new  insurrection  of  slaves  and 
criminals,  117.  Discovery  and  suppres- 
sion of  his  conspiracy,  117.  Condemna- 
tion of  his  associates  to  death,  122.  His 
letter  to  Catulus  from  Etruria,  130.  Puts 
himself  at  the  head  of  the  insurgents 
there,  121.  His  defeat  and  death,'  132. 
Assistance  given  by  the  deputies  of  the 
Allobroges,  in  Rome,  in  making  known 
the  conspiracy,  210. 

Cato,  the  censor,  i,  80,  81.  Warns  his  coun- 
trymen against  the  fatal  influence  of 
Greek  literature,  ii.  203. 

Cato,  C.,  tribune,  produces  an  alleged  Sibyl- 
line oracle  respecting  Egypt,  i.  327.  Har- 
asses the  senate,  330.  Loses  the  prretor- 
6hip,  339. 

Cato,  M.  Porcius,  his  early  career  and  char- 
acter, i.  79-81.  Obtains  a monthly  al- 
lowance of  corn  for  the  people,  125.  His 
speech  on  the  Catilinarian  conspiracy, 
125.  Irritates  the  equites  on  the  subject 
of  the  publicani  in  the  East,  125.  His  mo- 
rosity,  126.  Advocates  the  Stoic  philoso- 
phy, 133.  His  natural  good  humour,  134. 
Becomes  tribune,  134.  His  contest  with 
Metellus  Nepos,  141, 142.  His  opposition 
to  Clodius,  148-151.  Rejects  an  alliance 
with  Pompeius,  165.  Supports  Bibulus, 
168.  Opposes  Caesar's  agrarian  bill,  and 
arrested  by  Caesar’s  lictors.  172.  Refuses 
to  swear  obedience  to  the  bill,  173.  Im- 
plicated by  Vettius  in  an  assassination 
plot,  174.  Warns  the  senate  against  Pom- 
peius, 176.  Intrigue  for  removing  him 
from  Rome,  306.  "Compelled  to  execute  a 
commission  for  depriving  Ptolemaeus  of 
Cyprus  of  his  kingdom,  307,  308.  Exe- 
cutes it  with  moderation,  and  defends  the 
acts  of  Clodius,  307,  327.  Treats  Ptole- 
ma*us  with  contempt,  311.  Accompanied 
on  his  mission  by  M.  Junius  Brutus,  311. 
Unsuccessful  candidate  for  the  praetor- 
ship,  339,  358.  Opposes  the  bill  for  pro- 
longation of  Caesar’s  command  in  Gaul, 
842^343.  Proposes  that  Caesar  should  be 
delivered  to  the  Gauls,  372.  Supports  the 
nobles  in  refusing  the  dictatorship  to 
Pompeius , 438.  An  unsuccessful  candi- 


date for  the  consulship,  ii.  51.  His  neu- 
tral position  in  regard  to  Pompeius  and 
Cmsar,  84.  Appointed  to  govern  Sicily 
86.  Surrenders  Sicily  to  Curio,  121, 122. 
Possesses  little  influence  among  the  Pom- 
peians, 192,  Devotion  of  M.  Brutus  to 
him,  193.  His  second  marriage  with  Mar- 
cia, 194.  Leads  the  Pompeian  forces  from 
Dyrrachium  to  Corcyra,  250.  Saves  Cice- 
ro’s life,  251.  Unites  himself  with  C'n. 
Pompeius  the  younger,  and  crosses  over 
to  Africa,  283.  Marches  across  the  Lybian 
desert,  284.  Occupies  Utica,  885-3S8, 
Endeavours  to  animate  the  Romans  in 
Utica  to  defence,  297.  Commits  suicide, 
299.  Judgment  of  the  ancients  upon  this 
act,  300. 

Cato,  Marcus,  son  of  M.  Porcius,  his  death 
at  Philippi,  iii.  168. 

Catullinus,  Sextidius,  chosen  consul  in  the 
room  of  Sejanus,  v.  221. 

Catullus,  Valerius,  his  epigrams  on  Ctesar, 
ii.  362,  3S9. 

Catulus,  Q.  Lutatius,  his  character,  i.  64. 
For  many  years  princeps  of  the  senate, 
65,  73;  iii.  353.  Dissuades  the  grant  of 
extraordinary  powers  to  Pompeius  by  the 
Gabinian  and  Manilian  laws,  i.  74,  75. 
Attacks  Ca?sar  for  restoring  the  Marian 
trophies  and  statue  in  the  Capitol,  105, 112. 
Is  a candidate  for  the  office  of  Pontifex 
Maximus,  offers  to  buy  off  Ca?sar,  but  is 
defeated  by  him,  113.  Urges  Cicero  to 
include  Caesar  and  the  Marian  leaders 
among  the  Catilinarian  conspirators,  120. 
Catilina’s  letter  to  Catulus,  130.  Caesar’s 
attempt  to  deprive  Catulus  of  the  honour 
of  inscribing  his  name  on  the  Capitol  he 
had  restored,  135.  Caesar  defeated,  126. 
His  jest  at  the  judges  appointed  to  try 
Clodius,  152.  Elis  death,  170.  Cicero’s 
character  of  him,  170. 

Celer,  an  architect  employed  on  Nero’s 
u golden  house,”  vi.  141. 

Celibacy,  tendency  of  the  Romans  to,  at  the 
time  of  the  Gracchi,  iv.  87.  Laws  for  en- 
forcing marriage,  38.  Penalties  of  celi- 
bacy, 39. 

Celsus,  conspires  against  Hadrian,  and  put 
to  death,  vii.  336. 

Celtiberi,  their  conquest  and  rapid  assimi- 
lation to  the  Roman  type,  i.  155.  Their 
origin,  212. 

Cenotaphium  Pisanum,  to  the  memory  of 
Caius  and  Lucius  Ca?sar,  iv.  219. 

Censor,  the  office  of,  revived  by  Catulus,  i. 
73.  Restoratiou  of  the  authority  of  the 
censors  by  the  consul  Scipio,  ii.  50.  Sup- 
pressed from  a. it.  730,  iii.  401. 

Census  of  the  Roman  people  taken  by  Oc- 
tavius, iii.  327.  Of  part  of  Gaul  taken  by 
Augustus,  iv.  73.  Of  the  people,  in  a.d. 
14,  iv.  283,  307.  Distinction  between  the 
census  and  the  profession  325,  326.  Ac- 
curate information  possessed  by  the  Ro- 
mans on  the  subject  of  population,  329. 
Approximate  estimate  of  the  population 
of  Rome,  394.  Census  of  Claudius,  v.  386. 

Century,  the  prerogative,  i.  361. 

Cerealis,  Petilius,  commands  the  6th  le- 
gion in  Britain,  vi.  46.  Routed  by  the 
Iceni,  46.  Commands  a squadron  of  horse 


518 


INDEX. 


for  the  Flavians,  and  checked  outside 
Rome,  368.  Sent  to  oppose  Civilis  in 
Gaul,  403.  Enters  Moguntiaeum,  defeats 
the  Treviri,  and  at  Tieves  reasons  with 
the  mutineers,  405.  His  operations  in  the 
country  of  the  Treviri,  407.  Routs  the 
Germans  and  destroys  their  camp,  408. 
Defeats  Civilis,  408.  * His  want  if  vigi- 
lance, 409.  Treats  with  Civilis,  4x0.  His 
government  of  Britain,  vii.  70. 

Cerialis  conspires  against  Caius,  v.  359. 

Certus,  Pliny’s  attack  on,  vii.  163. 

Cestius  Gall  us,  governor  of  Syria,  his  disas- 
trous expedition  against  Jerusalem,  vi. 
427. 

Cetliegus,  joins  Catilina's  conspiracy,  i.  116. 

Ckitrea.  See  Cassius. 

Chariot  races,  iv.  414.  In  the  time  of  the 
emperor  Caius,  v.  300. 

Charouit*,  or  Orcini,  origin  of  the  name, 

iii.  52. 

Chatti,  a German  tribe,  overcome  by  Ger- 
manicus,  and  their  stronghold  destroyed, 
v.  31.  Punished  by  Galba,  377.  And  by 
Doinitian,  vii.  82. 

Chauci,  the,  admitted  into  alliance  with 
Rome,  iv.  266.  Punished  by  Corbulo, 
v.  377  ; vi.  14. 

Cherusci,  a German  tribe,  submit  to  Caesar, 

iv.  237.  Their  war  with  the  Marcomanni, 

v.  54.  A king  (Italicus)  given  to  them  by 
Claudius,  vi.  13. 

Chian  wines,  iv.  316. 

Chorographical  surveys  in  use  at  Rome, 
iv.  325. 

Chosroes,  king  of  Parthio,  his  interference 
in  the  affairs  of  Armenia,  vii.  298.  His 
presents  rejected  by  Trajan,  298.  His 
feuds  with  liis  vassals,  304.  Escapes  from 
Trajan’s  lieutenants  into  Media,  306.  Cap- 
ture of  his  daughter,  and  of  his  golden 
throne,  306.  Restoration  of  his  daughter, 
330. 

Ckrestus.  the  sophist,  his  answer  to  Hadrian, 
vii.  361. 

Christ,  date  of  nis  birth,  iv.  347. 

Christians ; first  persecution  of  the  persons 
“ to  whom  the  vulgar  gave  the  name  of 
Christians,”  vi.  134.  The  first  Christians 
in  Rome,  210.  Toleration  allowed  them 
by  the  government,  213.  Story  of  Pom- 
ponia  Graecina,  215.  Outburst  of  the  per- 
secution in  Rome,  216.  Difficulty  of 
accounting  for  this  supposed  persecution 
of  the  Christians,  217.  Christianity  little 
noticed  in  Rome  before,  and  for  some 
time  after,  Nero,  219.  Question  as  to  the 
persons  designated  Christians,  220.  Con- 
jecture of  Gibbon,  221.  Suggestion  of 
another  view,  221.  General  religious  tol- 
eration under  Nero,  223.  Reflections  on 
the  depraved  morality  of  the  age,  226. 
Christianity  congenial  to  certain  moral 
tendencies  of  the  age,  229.  The  Christians 
retire  from  Jerusalem  shortly  before  the 
siege,  459.  Hostile  attitude  of  Domitian 
towards  Christianity,  vii.  123.  Alleged 
persecution  under  him,  127.  Overthrow 
of  the  Jewish  and  succession  of  the  Chris- 
tian dispensation,  291.  Inquisition  into 
die  tenets  of  the  Christians,  287.  Alleged 
decrees  of  Nero  and  Domitian,  287.  Pliny’s 


letter  to  Trajan  respecting  the  Christians 
in  Bithynia,  288.  Pliny’s  proceedings 
against  them  there,  289.  His  testimony 
to  their  virtues,  291.  Popular  apprehen- 
sion of  their  political  intrigues,  292.  Su 
perstitious  terrors  of  the  people,  292. 
The  martyrdom  of  St.  Ignatius,  293.  De 
velopment  of  the  Christian  society,  294. 
The  Church,  the  Canon  of  Scripture,  and 
Episcopacy,  295.  Final  separation  of  tho 
Christians  from  the  Jews,  319.  The 
Christian  teachers  and  apologists  of  tlio 
second  century  a.d.,  363.  Hadrian’s  tol- 
eration of  the  Christian  faith,  and  interest 
taken  by  him  in  the  dogmatic  teaching  of 
the  Christians,  369.  373.  Indulgence  of 
Antoninus  Pius  to  them,  405.  Persecution 
of  them  under  M.  Aurelius,  488.  Early 
martyrs,  489. 

Christs,  false,  or  brigands,  in  Judea,  vi.  420. 

Cibyra,  state  of,  in  the  time  of  Augustus, 
iv.  362. 

Cicero,  M.  Tullius,  engaged  on  the  prosecu- 
tion of  Yerres,  i.  71.  His  services  engaged 
in  transferring  a share  of  the  judicia  to 
the  knights,  72.  His  early  career,  75-77. 
Impeaches  Yerres,  71.  Acts  with  Pom- 
peius and  Crassus,  72.  Defends  Fonteius 
73,  208.  Defends  Rabirius,  108.  Effects 
of  foreign  learning  on  his  skill  and  ex 
perience,  97.  Opposes  the  agrarian  law 
of  Rullus,  111.  Defends  C.  Calpurnius 
Piso,  112.  The  Catilinarian  conspiracy, 
117-124.  Becomes  consul,  116.  Prevents 
the  murder  of  Caesar,  124.  Inclines  to  the 
senatorial  order,  125.  Defends  the  consul 
Murena,  133.  His  popularity,  141,  150. 
Addressed  as  “Father  of  his  country,” 
141.  Joins  in  the  outcry  against  Clodius, 
148.  Crassus’  panegyric  upon  the  conduct 
of  Cicero,  150.  His~ speech  in  the  Flamin- 
ian  Circus,  150.  Makes  an  implacable 
enemy  of  Clodius,  153.  His  views  of  the 
proposed  agrarian  law  of  the  tribune 
Flavius,  161.  Cajoled  by  Pompeius,  166. 
Opposes  the  restoration  of  the  collegia , 
178.  Danger  of  his  position,  180.  Rejects 
Caesar’s  friendly  overtures,  181.  Appeals 
to  the  compassion  of  the  people,  182.  And 
to  Pompeius  and  the  consuls,  183.  Goes 
into  exile,  186.  Considerations  on  his 
banishment  and  confiscation  of  his  prop- 
erty, 298-305.  His  unmanly  complaints 
in  exile,  313.  Exertions  of  his  friends  in 
his  behalf,  315.  High  spirit  of  his  wife 
Terentia,  319.  Takes  up  his  residence  at 
Dyrrachium,  319.  His  return  to  Rome, 
323.  Attacks  Caesar’s  law  for  the  division 
of  lands  in  Campania,  334.  Attaches  him- 
self to  the  triumvirs,  335.  His  speech 
“ de  Provinciis  Consular ibus" 337.  His 
political  position  and  mental  resources, 
347,  348.  His  hatred  of  Crassus,  343. 
Attacks  Gabinius,  355.  Defends  him, 
357.  Affects  cordiality  towards  Crassus, 
857.  Apologizes  for  his  conduct  in 
supporting  the  triumvirs,  358.  His 
speech  “ Pro  Milone ,”  439.  His  activity 
in  pleading,  ii.  52.  His  attachment  to  tho 
younger  Curio,  52.  Elected  auger,  53. 
Governs  Cilicia,  54-57.  His  military  ex- 
ploits and  civil  administration,  57.  Re 


INDEX. 


519 


turns  to  Italy,  79.  Claims  a triumph,  79. 
Confers  with  Pompeius  on  the  state  of  af- 
fairs, 79.  Put  in  charge  of  the  Campanian 
coast,  86.  His  interview  with  Pompeius 
at  Forming,  93.  Hesitates  between  Caesar 
and  Pompeius,  95.  His  fears  and  melan- 
choly, 108.  His  interview  with  Caesar 
at  Formiae,  122.  Forbidden  to  leave  Italy, 
171.  His  scurrility  to  Antonius,  172.  Ar- 
rives in  the  Pompeian  camp,  191.  Dis- 
satisfaction of  the  nobles  with  him,  226. 
Withdraws  from  the  contest,  251.  His  life 
threatened  by  young  Pompeius,  251.  Al- 
lowed to  establish  himself  at  Brundisium, 
277.  Well  received  by  Caesar,  278.  Con- 
ceives the  idea  of  a complete  code  of  laws, 
S34.  Courts  and  is  offended  by  Cleopatra, 
843.  His  speech  u Pro  Marcello ,”  344. 
And  for  Ligarius,  344.  Visited  by  Caesar 
at  Puteoli,  361.  His  letter  to  Caesar  on 
the  invasion  of  Parthia,  363.  A partisan 
of  liberal  innovation,  his  pure  morality, 
415.  Joins  Brutus  and  the  conspirators  in 
the  Capitol,  iii.  11.  Urges  them  to  as- 
sume the  government,  13.  Advocates  the 
ratification  of  Caesar’s  acts,  24,  26.  Disap- 
proves of  the  speech  of  Brutus,  29.  Ap- 
peal of  the  false  Marius  to  him,  and  his 
ironical  reply,  48.  Eetires  to  Puteoli,  49, 

54.  His  alarm  at  the  agrarian  law  of  L. 
Antonius,  53.  His  behaviour  to  Dolabella, 

55.  His  first  interview  with  Octavius,  58. 
His  efforts  to  form  a conservative  party, 
64.  His  interview  with  the  libetators  at 
Antium,  70,  71.  Joins  Brutus,  74.  His 
melancholy  anticipations  and  irresolution ; 
composes  his  treatises  on  “Old  Age,” 
“ Friendship,”  “ Glory,”  and  “ Fate,”  75- 
77.  Embarks  for  Greece,  but  returns  to 
Pome,  82-84.  Delivers  his  first  Philippic, 
86.  Ilis  activity  and  spirit,  94.  Com- 
poses his  second  Philippic,  95.  His  mis- 
taken estimate  of  Octavius,  97.  Composes 
his  “ Treatise  on  Moral  Duties,”  98.  Ef- 
fect produced  by  the  publication  of  the 
second  Philippic,  99.  His  position  in  the 
commonwealth,  99.  The  third  and  fourth 
Philippics,  100.  Enthusiasm  of  the  peo- 
ple, 100.  Opposes  negotiation  with  An- 
tonius,  102.  Composes  his  fifth  Philippic, 

102.  His  glowing  panegyric  on  Octavius, 

103.  Harangues  the  people  in  his  sixth 
Philippic,  104.  Is  himself  the  govern- 
ment, 106.  Indignant  at  the  treatment  of 
the  senatorian  envoys  by  Antonius,  107. 
His  eighth  Philippic,  107.  Proposes  a 
monument  to  Sulpicius,  108.  Causes  the 
senate  to  proclaim  Dolabella  a public 
enemy,  111.  His  twelfth  Philippic,  113. 
Named  one  of  a deputation  to  Antonius, 
and  accedes,  but  subsequently  recoils,  113. 
Peplies  of  Antonius  and  Cicero’s  rejoinder, 
115.  In  the  consuls’  absence  he  assumes 
the  lead  in  the  city,  116.  Enthusiasm  of 
the  citizens  towards  him,  120.  His  four- 
teenth and  last  Philippic,  120.  Abandons 
all  hope  of  Octavius,  128.  His  sarcasm  on 
Octavius’s  demand  for  the  consulship, 
130.  Abandoned  to  proscription  by  Octa- 
vius, 139-141.  Doomed  to  massacre,  141. 
His  proscription  and  flight,  144, 145.  His 
vacillation,  arrest,  and  death,  146,  147. 


Deflections  on  his  death  and  character, 
148-153. 

Cicero,  M.,  son  of  M.  Cicero  and  Terentia, 
offers  his  services  to  Brutus,  iii.  172.  In 
arms  against  the  triumvirs,  173. 

Cicero,  Quintus,  brother  of  M.  Tullius,  his 
military  education  under  Caesar,  i.  264. 
His  propraetorship  in  Asia,  315.  Ap- 
pointed a commissioner  for  provisioning 
the  city,  325  note.'3  His  letters  from  Sar- 
dinia to  his  brother,  335.  Accepts  the 
post  of  legatus  to  Pompeius  in  Spain,  347, 
358.  His  camp  in  the  Nervian  territory 
attacked  by  the  Belgians,  394.  His  char- 
acter, 394.  His  resolute  defence,  395.  Be- 
lieved by  Caesar,  396.  Left  with  one  legion 
in  Aduatuca,  400,  403.  Attacked  by  the 
Germans  who  are  repulsed,  404.  Sup- 
ports his  brother  Marcus  in  his  govern- 
ment of  Cilicia,  ii.  57.  Abandons’ Caesar, 
but  endeavours  to  regain  his  favour 
by  calumniating  his  brother,  278.  Pro- 
scribed by  the  triumvirs,  iii.  145.  Returns 
to  Rome,  and  with  his  son  is  murdered. 
145, 146. 

Cilicia,  government  of,  falls  by  lot  to  Lentu- 
lus  Spinther,  i.  328.  The  proconsulship 
of,  accepted  with  reluctance  by  Cicero,  ii. 
54.  State  of  the  province  at  this  period, 
54.  Placed  under  the  control  of  Sestius, 
ii.  86.  Given  by  Antonius  to  Polemo,  iii. 
190.  Extent  of  the  province,  iv.  108. 
Affairs  in  the  times  of  the  triumvirate  and 
of  Augustus,  109.  Desire  of  the  inhabit- 
ants of  the  autonomous  districts  of  Cilicia 
to  be  placed  under  the  dominion  of  Rome, 
v.  51.  The  whole  absorbed  into  the 
Roman  empire,  vii.  23. 

Cilician  pirates,  their  origin,  i.  45.  Their 
exploits,  45-48.  Suppressed  by  Cn.  Pom- 
peius, 48.  Their  capture  of  Caesar,  98. 

Cilnii,  the  royal  house  of  Arretium,  decline 
of  their  fortunes,  iii.  214. 

Cimber,  L.  Tillius,  joins  the  conspiracy 
against  Caesar’s  life,  ii.  375.  Obtains  the 
government  of  Bithynia,  iii.  31. 

Cimbri,  the  origin  and  great  migration  of,  i. 
198.  Defeat  the  Romans  and  overrun 
Gaul,  but  destroyed  at  Vercellae,  201-206. 

Cingetorix,  chieftain  of  the  Treviri,  favour- 
ed by  Caesar,  i.  284.  Denounced  by  In- 
dutiomarus,  398. 

Cinna,  Cnaeus  Cornelius,  conspires  against 
Augustus,  iv.  223.  Pardoned  and  raised 
to  the  consulship,  224.  The  story  exam- 
ined, 226. 

Cinna,  Cornelius,  his  rehabilitation  obtained 
by  his  brother-in-law  Caesar,  i.  101.  Lays 
down  his  praetorian  insignia,  iii.  16.  Puts 
on  his  praetor’s  robes,  and  is  maltreated  by 
the  populace,  20. 

Cinna,  Helvius,  his  insulting  proposal  re- 
specting Caesar,  ii.  342.  Torn  to  pieces  at 
Caesar’s  funeral,  iii.  42. 

Circus,  taste  of  the  Italians  for  the  games  of 
the,  ii.  312  ; iv.  414.  Extent  of  the  Circus 
Maximus,  iv.  403.  The  circus  described. 
414.  Chariot  races,  414.  Exhibition  of 
wild  beasts,  415.  Gladiatorial  combats, 
416.  Sentiments  of  antiquity  on  these 
bloody  spectacles,  416.  The  circus  in  the 
time  of  the  emperor  Caius,  v.  294,  300.  Of 


520 


INDEX. 


Claudius,  894.  And  of  Nero,  vi.  126.  "Who 
drives  his  chariot  in  the  Circus  Maximus, 
126.  Erection  of  the  Colosseum,  iv.  413; 
vii.  36. 

Cirta,  capital  of  Numidia,  threatened  by  the 
Mauretanians,  ii.  292. 

Cities,  the  great,  of  the  Roman  empire,  and 
Grecian  cities  in  Italy,  iv.  350-365. 

Citizenship,  Roman,  iii.  390.  Augustus  af- 
fects to  maintain  the  estimation  of,  390. 
Number  of  citizens  in  a.  u.  767,  iv.  307. 

Civil  law.  See  Law. 

'Jivilis,  Claudius,  chief  of  the  Batavi, 
snatched  from  the  fury  of  the  legionaries, 

vi.  821.  Injured  by  the  Romans,  386. 
Excites  the  Gaulish  states  to  revolt,  388. 
Defeats  Mummius  Lupercus  in  the  island 
of  the  Batavi,  3S9.  Beleaguers  the  station 
of  Castra  Vetera,  392, 394.  Envoys  to  him 
from  Vespasian,  395.  Takes  Asciburgium 
and  attacks  Vocula,  but  retreats  with 
heavy  loss,  396.  His  success,  and  antici- 
pations of  Gaulish  emancipation,  399. 
Communicates  with  the  auxiliaries  in  the 
Roman  camp,  400.  Massacres  the  garrison 
of  Vetera,  401.  Seeks  to  form  a German 
kingdom  at  Colonia  Agrippinensis,  401. 
Courts  Veleda,  the  Batavian  prophetess, 
402.  Cooperates  with  Classicus,  406.  His 
wife  and  children  in  the  hands  of  the 
Romans,  408.  Defeated  before  Castra 
Vetera,  408.  Crosses  the  Rhine,  and  en- 
ters the  territories  of  his  allies,  the  Chauci 
and  Frisii,  409.  Treats  with  the  Romans, 
410.  His  end  unknown,  411. 

Civitft  Vecchia,  Trajan’s  wall  at,  vii.  205. 

Clarus,  Erucias,  assists  in  reducing  Seleucia, 

vii.  306,  307. 

Clarissimi,  the,  described,  vii.  439. 

Classes,  distinction  of,  in  the  Roman  em- 
pire, iv.  302.  Citizens,  subjects,  and  allies, 
802.  Slaves,  302.  Distinctions  of  condi- 
tion in  the  provinces,  305.  Independent 
communities  gradually  reduced  to  subjec- 
tion, 306.  Numbers  of  the  citizens,  307. 
Indirect  effect  of  slavery  in  combining  the 
various  classes  of  men  together,  309.  Set 
Romans. 

Classicus,  a Gaulish  officer  of  Treviri.  enters 
into  a conspiracy  to  liberate  Gaul,  vi.  399. 
Takes  Vocula’s  life,  400.  Endeavours  to 
corrupt  Cerealis,  406. 

Classicianus,  procurator,  in  Britain,  com- 
plains to  Nero  of  Suetonius  Paulinus,  who 
is  removed  in  consequence,  vi.  50. 

Claudia  Pulchra,  found  guilty  of  adultery 
and  majestas,  v.  191. 

Claudia,  or  Clauailla,  married  to  Cains 
Caesar  (Caligula),  v.  236,  252.  Her  death, 
252. 

Claudia,  infant  daughter  of  the  emperor 
Claudius,  abandoned,  v.  399. 

Claudia,  daughter  of  Caractacus,  vi.  38. 

Claudian  and  Flavian  writers  compared,  vii. 

222. 

Claudius,  Appius,  elected  consul,  i.  353.  His 
unblushing  venality,  353,  354.  Entrusted 
by  the  Senate  with  the  province  of  Achaia, 
ii.  217.  Consults  the  oracle  at  Delphi, 
217.  His  delusion  and  death,  218. 

Claudius  (Tiberius  Claudius  Drusus),  his  in- 
firmities of  health  and  understanding,  v. 


248.  nis  early  life,  v.  248,  872.  Asso« 
ciated  by  the  emperor  Caius  with  himself 
in  the  consulship,  290.  His  extraordinary 
industry  in  literary  labor,  874,  375.  Cir- 
cumstances of  his  accession  to  the  empire, 
366.  The  senate  accepts  the  choice  of 
the  praetorians,  368.  His  moderation  and 
good  intentions,  369,  870.  Takes  Augus- 
tus for  his  model,  377.  His  military  enter- 
prises and  conduct  of  foreign  affairs  and 
of  the  colonies,  378,  379.  Maintains  the 
dignity,  and  revises  the  list,  of  the  senate, 
882.  Opens  it  to  provincial  families,  and 
especially  to  Gaulish  nobles,  383.  Revises 
the  lists  of  the  knights,  3S5.  His  censor- 
ship, 386.  His  measures  for  the  conser- 
vation of  religion,  387.  His  administra- 
tion of  justice,  3S8, 419.  His  public  works, 
390.  The  new  haven  at  Ostia,  391.  Drains 
Lake  Fucinus,  392.  His  shows  and  pro- 
visions for  the  amusement  of  the  people, 
393.  His  intemperance,  396.  The  history 
of  the  wives  of  the  princeps  becomes  that 
of  the  principate  in  his  reign,  896.  His 
wives,  398.  Influence  of  Messalina,  and 
regimen  of  freedmen,  400.  Claudius  their 
tool,  406.  He  recalls  the  sisters  of  Caius 
from  exile,  and  banishes  Seneca,  406. 
Conflicting  statements  of  his  weakness 
and  good  sense,  409-411.  Vinicianus  and 
others  conspire  against  him,  409.  Strange 
inconsistency  in  the  accounts  of  his  con- 
duct, 411.  His  expedition  to  Britain,  413. 
His  son,  surnamed  Britannicus,  413.  His 
diligence  in  administering  the  laws,  418. 
His  secular  games,  421.  Marriage  of  Mes- 
salina with  Silius  perhaps  instigated  by 
Claudius  from  a superstitious  motive,  427. 
His  alarm,  430.  And  last  meeting  with 
Messalina,  433.  His  vacillation  about  her 
sentence,  434.  Intrigues  for  supplying  a 
successor  to  Messalina,  436.  Claudius 
marries  Agrippina,  440.  Adopts  Domitius 
Nero,  444.  Attacked  by  the  people  in  the 
forum,  449.  His  measures  for  promoting 
morality  and  good  order,  449.  Extends 
the  privileges  of  the  knights,  451.  His 
remark  on  the  crimes  and  punishment  of 
his  wives,  454.  His  decline,  456.  Poi- 
soned by  Agrippina,  456.  Estimate  of  his 
character,  459,  460.  Seneca’s  adoration 
and  abuse  of  Claudius,  460^466.  History 
of  his  invasion  and  conquest  of  southern 
Britain,  vi.  8 et  seq.  Claudius  by  birth  a 
Gaul,  8.  His  liberal  policy  towards  the 
Gauls,  9.  His  proscription  of  Druidism, 
12.  Gives  a king  to  the  Cheruscans,  13. 
Prepares  to  invade  Britain,  20.  Orders 
Aulus  Plautius  to  invade  the  island,  20. 
Takes  the  command  in  person,  and  defeats 
the  Trinobantes,  24,  25.  Triumphs  at 
Rome,  25.  His  clemency  to  Caractacus, 
37.  His  funeral  oration  pronounced  by 
Nero,  65.  Who  consecrates  a temple  to 
him,  84. 

Clemens,  the  pretended  Agrippa  Posthu 
mus,  his  adventures,  v.  88.* 

Clemens,  Flavius,  accused  of  Judaizing  and 
put  to  death,  vii.  126. 

Cleopatra,  daughter  of  Ptolemreus  Auletes, 
joint  heir  to  the  crown  of  Egypt  with  her 
brother  Ptolemasus  XII.,  ii.  243.  Driven 


INDEX. 


521 


from  Alexandria,  244.  Her  quarrels  with 
her  brother,  244.  Her  first  interview  with 
Caesar,  256.  Restored  to  the  throne  by 
him,  256.  Her  evil  influence  on  Caesar, 
27:3-275.  Visits  Rome,  where  she  makes 
him  unpopular,  and  offends  Cicero,  341- 
343.  Her  disappointment  at  the  result  of 
Caesar’s  will,  iii.  33.  Quits  Rome,  33.  Her 
first  meeting  at  Tarsus  with  Antonius, 
who  follows  her  to  xllexandria,  175.  Their 
intimacy,  broken  by  his  marriage  with 
Octavia,  renewed,  21*9.  Her  twins  by  An- 
tonius, 220.  Roman  provinces  assigned 
by  Antonius  to  her  and  her  children,  226. 
Her  ambitious  views,  227.  Her  orgies, 
228,  229.  At  Samos,  238;  Octavius  de- 
clares war  against  her,  238.  Induces  An- 
tonius to  decide  the  war  at  sea,  245.  Of- 
fends his  officers,  247.  Counsels  Antonius 
to  return  to  Egypt,  250.  Their  flight  from 
Actium,  252.  Her  severities  to  the  Alex- 
andrians and  to  Artavasdes,  and  prepara- 
tions for  escape,  260,  261.  Her  plans  dis- 
concerted, 261.  Adopts  measures  of  de- 
fence, and  negotiates  with  Octavius,  261. 
Her  revelries  and  despair,  262.  Hopes  to 
make  an  impression  on  the  heart  of  Oc- 
tavius, 264.  Spreads  a report  of  her  own 
death,  265.  Her  interview  with  the  dying 
Antonius,  265.  Taken  prisoner  by  Pro- 
culeius,  266.  Her  interview  with  Octa- 
vius, and  suicide,  267,  268.  Manner  of 
her  death  uncertain,  270.  Her  effigy 
borne  in  triumph,  270.  The  “ Loves  of 
Antony  and  Cleopatra,”  275.  Cleopatra 
makes  advances  to  Herod,  which  he  re- 
jects, 307. 

Cleopatra  Selene,  daughter  of  M.  Antonius 
and  Cleopatra,  endowed  by  her  father 
with  the  sovereignty  of  Cyrene,  iii.  226. 
Marries  the  younger  Juba,  iv.  91. 

Clivus  Asyli,  iv.  377. 

Clivus  Capitolinus,  iv.  377. 

Clodia,  daughter  of  P.  Clodius  and  Fulvia, 
married  "to  Octavius,  iii.  140,  217.  Di- 
vorced by  Octavius,  183,  217. 

Clodius,  C.,  defeated  by  Spartacus,  i.  50, 51. 

Clodius,  P.,  his  charge  of  malversation 
against  Catilina,  i.  114.  His  early  life  and 
character,  145.  His  intrigue  with  Pom- 
peia,  wife  of  Caesar,  146.  Profanes  the 
mysteries  of  Bona  Dea,  146-148.  Failure 
of  the  proceedings  against  him,  151,  152. 
He  meditates  vengeance  against  the  no- 
bles, Cicero  especially,  153.  Elected  a 
tribune  of  the  people,  177.  Clodius’s 
acts;  repeals  the  yElian  and  Fufian  laws, 
177-179.  Drives  Cicero  into  exile,  184, 
298.  Razes  Cicero’s  house  on  the  Pala- 
tine, and  plunders  his  Tusculan  villa, 
299-302.  His  triumphant  career,  305. 
Assigns  provinces  to  Pisa  and  Gabinius, 
805.  " His  intrigue  for  removing  Cato  from 
Rome,  306.  Reaction  against  Clodius,  321. 
His  increasing  violence,  321.  Opposed  by 
Milo,  322.  Hostile  attitude  of  the  senate 
towards  him,  326.  Becomes  tedile,  329. 
Renewal  of  his  contests  with  Milo,  330. 
Cast  off  by  Pompeius,  330.  Candidate  for 
the  praetorship,  435.  His  encounter  with 
Milo  on  the  Appian  way,  and  death,  436. 

Clodius,  Sextus,  his  resolution  denouncing 


Cicero,  i.  299,  800.  Punished  for  a breach 
of  the  peace,  ii.  41  His  recall  from  ban- 
ishment proposed  by  Antonius,  iii.  46.  In 
arms  against  the  triumvirs,  173. 

Cnidos  seized  by  the  Cicilian  pirates,  i.  47 
note.  State  j»f,  in  the  time  of  Augustus, 

iv.  360. 

Cocceianus,  put  to  death  by  Domitian,  vii 
147. 

Cceli-Syria  submits  to  the  Roman  yoke,  1 
138.  Given  to  Herod  the  Great,  iii.  303. 
Ccenis,  Vespasian’s  mistress,  vii.  19. 
Cogidubnus,  king  of  the  Regni,  vassal  of 
Rome,  takes  the  name  of  Tiberius  Clau- 
dius, vi.  27. 

Colchester,  colony  of,  founded  by  Claudius, 

v.  379. 

Colleges,  or  guilds  of  trades,  in  Rome,  i 177. 
Restored  by  Clodius,  178.  Dissolved  by 
Caesar,  ii.  333. 

Colonia  Agrippinensis  (Cologne)  founded  by 
Agrippina,  v.  379,  445.  Civilis  seeks  to 
found  a German  sovereignty  at  Colonia, 

vi.  401. 

Colonies  of  Augustus  and  Claudius,  v.  379 ; 

vi.  31.  Character  of  the  Roman  colony  in 
Britain,  31.  Those  of  Vespasian  in  Lati- 
um  and  Campania  a symptom  of  the  de- 
crease of  population  in  Italy,  vii.  26. 

Colophon  seized  by  the  Cicilian  pirates,  i. 
47  note. 

Colosseum,  erection  and  description  of  the, 

vii.  36-40.  Dedication  of,  by  Titus,  55. 
Comet,  accounted  the  precursor  of  Nero’s 

fall,  vi.  143. 

Comitia,  the,  abolished  by  Tiberius,  v.  17. 
Its  threefold  functions: — 1.  Election  of 
magistrates,  98.  2.  The  power  of  legisla- 
tion, 101.  3.  And  criminal  jurisdiction, 
107.  Transferred  to  the  senate,  and  thence 
to  the  emperor,  112.  Restored  for  a time 
by  Caligula,  v.  2S9. 

Commagene,  kingdom  of,  iv.  113.  Present- 
ed by  Augustus  to  a child  named  Mithri- 
dates,  113.  Desire  of  the  people  of,  to  be 
under  the  dominion  of  Rome,  v.  51. 
Placed  under  the  government  of  a pro- 
praetor, 269.  Restored  by  Claudius  to  An- 
tiochus,  379.  Deprived  of  its  autonomy 
by  Vespasian,  vii.  24. 

Commerce,  the,  of  the  Mediterranean,  iv. 
313.  Limited  character  of  ancient,  31.7 
Security  of  maritime  commerce  under  the 
Empire,  381. 

Commius,  the  Atrebate,  sent  by  Caesar  to 
Britain,  i.  379.  Made  prisoner,  but  re- 
leased by  the  Britons,  381.  His  romantic 
adventures  and  hatred  of  the  Romans,  ii. 
36.  Perfidy  of  Labienus  to  him,  38.  Sur- 
renders himself  to  Caesar  upon  honourable 
terms,  38. 

Communi,  an  Alpine  tribe,  defeated  by  P, 
Silius,  iv.  160. 

Comum.  Novum,  colony  at,  founded  by 
Caesar,  ii.  62. 

Conan  Meriadec,  obtains  a sovereignty  in 
Brittany,  i.  217  note '. 

Concord,  temple  of,  meeting  of  the  senate  in 
the,  i.  121. 

Concubinage  among  the  Romans,  ii.  273. 
Condrusi,  a German  tribe,  join  the  Belgia 
confederacy,  i.  267.  Submit  to  Caesar, 400k 


522 


INDEX. 


Conetodonus,  a Gaulish  chieftain,  attacks 
the  .Romans,  ii.  12. 

Congentiatus,  son  of  Bituitus,  prince  of  the 
Arvernians,  i.  196. 

Consentia  besieged  by  Sextus  Pompeius, 
iii.  182. 

Considius  Longus,  C.,  holds  Adrumetum  for 
the  republicans,  ii.  290.  Railed  by  the 
Gaetulians,  302. 

Considius,  appointed  to  the  government  of 
Cisalpine  Gaul,  ii.  86. 

Consistorium,  the,  of  the  emperors,  de- 
scribed, vii.  438. 

Constitutionis  principis,  iii.  378. 

Consuls,  their  term  of  office  abridged  by 
Caesar,  ii.  325.  Institution  of  the  office  of, 
iii.  344.  The  consul  imperator  only  in 
the  field,  345.  Lays  aside  the  ensigns  of 
command  on  entering  the  city,  except 
only  in  the  case  of  a triurhph,  345,  346. 
The  consulship  under  the  republic,  356. 
The  office  usurped  by  Julius  Caesar,  358. 
Numerous  and  successive  consulships  of 
Octavius,  358.  Events  which  led  to  con- 
ferring on  Augustus  the  “potestas  con- 
sularis,”  365.  Position  of  the  consuls 
under  the  empire,  399.  The  appointment 
of  the  consuls  by  the  people  abolished  by 
Tiberius,  v.  17.  State  of  the  consulship 
in  the  Flavian  era,  vii.  432. 

Convictolitans  elected  vergobret  of  the 
ASdui,  ii.  19.  Betrays  his  patron  Caesar, 
ii.  21. 

Coponius,  C.,  commands  a squadron  of  Rho- 
dians in  the  service  of  Pompeius,  ii.  204. 

Coracles,  built  after  the  British  model  by 
Caesar  in  Spain,  ii.  142. 

Corbulo,  Domitius,  his  successes  over  the 
Chauci,  v.  377 ; vi.  14.  Ilis  campaign  in 
Germany,  14.  His  canal  from  the  Maas 
to  the  Rhine,  15.  His  campaigns  in  Ar- 
menia, 265.  Places  Tigranes  on  the 
throne,  265.  His  vigorous  measures  in 
Judea,  424.  Is  formidable  to  Nero,  268, 
272.  Summoned  by  Nero  to  Greece,  and 
destroys  himself,  272. 

^orcyra,  taken  by  Octavius  from  the  Anto- 
nians, iii.  247. 

Corduba,  Caesar  at,  ii.  160. 

Corellius  Rufus,  Pliny’s  account  of  his  sui- 
cide, quoted,  vii.  256. 

Corfinium,  Domitius,  defeated  by  Caesar  at, 
ii.  104. 

Corinth,  condition  of,  at  the  time  of  Augus- 
tus, iv.  352,  353.  Nero’s  proposed  canal 
through  the  isthmus,  vi.  271. 

Corn-fleets  of  the  Mediterranean  and  Roman 
traffic  in  corn,  iv.  313.  Rejoicings  in 
Egypt  on  the  arrival  of  the  Egyptian 
corn -fleet,  314. 

Cornelia,  wife  of  Caesar,  ordered  by  Sulla  to 
be  divorced,  i.  93.  The  command  disre- 
garded by  her  husband,  93.  Her  funeral 
oration  pronounced  by  Caesar,  161  note  *.- 

Cornelia,  the  vestal  virgin,  buried  alive, 
vii.  105. 

Cornelia,  daughter  of  Scipio,  married  to  Pom- 
peius, ii.  47.  Sent  for  security  to  Lesbos, 
193.  Witnesses  the  murder  of  her  hus- 
band, 246. 

Cornificius,  L.,  prosecutes  Brutus  for  the 
murder  of  Caesar,  iii.  133.  Commands  a 


corps  for  Octavius  in  Sicily,  200.  His  gal 
lant  retreat  to  Mylae,  200. 

Cornificius,  Q.,  the  younger,  sent  by  Caesar 
to  hold  lllyricum,  ii.  266. 

Cornutus,  tutor  of  Persius,  friend  of  the 
Senecas,  vi.  233. 

Correspondence  of  the  Romans,  collection  of 
private,  vii.  249.  The  letters  of  the  younger 
Pliny,  250. 

Correus,  king  of  the  Bellovaci,  defeated  and 
killed,  ii.  36. 

Corsica,  under  the  Romans,  i.  33;  iv.  123, 
Population  of,  under  the  empire,  340. 
Sides  with  Otho  against  Yitellius,  vi.  331. 

Cos,  the  emperor  Claudius  pleads  for  the 
boon  of  immunity  to,  v.  453. 

Cosconius,  a senator,  killed  by  Caesar’s  mu- 
tinous soldiers,  ii.  282. 

Cotta,  Aurelius,  his  conquests  in  Gaul,  i. 
117.  Serves  under  Caesar,  264.  Sent  with 
Sabinus  to  chastise  the  Menapii,  382. 
Attacked  by  the  Eburones  under  Ambio- 
rix,  392.  Killed  in  am  ambuscade,  393. 

Cotta,  entrusted  by  the  senate  with  the  care 
of  Sardinia,  ii.  86. 

Cottius,  king  of  the  Cottian  Alps,  his  treaty 
with  Augustus,  iv.  87,  88. 

Cotuatus,  a chieftain  of  the  Carnutes,  revolts 
against  the  Romans,  ii.  12. 

Council  of  State  instituted  by  Augustus,  iv. 
146.  The  consistorium  or  auditorium, 
vii.  439. 

Coway  Stakes,  supposed  origin  of  the  name 
of  the,  i.  387. 

Crassus,  Calpurnius,  lays  a plan  for  assassi- 
nating Trajan,  vii.  213.  Put  to  death,  213. 

Crassus,  Otacilius,  in  the  service  of  Pom- 
peius, ii.  205.  Massacres  a detachment  of 
Caesarians,  205.  An  adherent  of  L.  An- 
tonius,  iii.  181.  Commands  an  immense 
armament  of  Antonians,  245. 

Crassus,  M.  Licinius,  appointed  to  continue 
the  war  against  Spartacus,  i.  51.  Crushes 
the  insurrection,  52.  His  banquet  to  the 
citizens,  52.  His  character,  66.  His  name 
proverbial  as  the  “richest  of  the  Romans,” 
67.  Modes  in  which  he  made  his  money, 
67.  Unites  with  Pompeius  in  transferring 
a share  in  the  judicia  to  the  knights,  72. 
Supports  the  Manilian  Bill,  75, 103.  The 
nobles  seek  to  involve  him  in  the  charge 
of  conspiring  with  Catilina,  114, 119.  Ilis 
spoliation  of  the  temple  of  Jerusalem,  139 
note  *,  iii.  300.  His  panegyric  upon  the 
conduct  of  Cicero,  i 150.  Joins  with 
Pompeius  and  Caesar  in  the  first  triumvi- 
rate, 168.  Supports  Caesar  in  his  claim 
for,  the  proconsulship  of  the  Cauls  and 
lllyricum,  176.  His  enmity  with  Pom- 
peius, but  reconciled  by  Caesar  at  Lucca, 
333.  Elected  consul  with  Pompeius,  339. 
Their  turbulent  election,  339.  Bill  of 
Tribonius  for  giving  the  province  of  Syria 
to  Crassus,  342.  Hatred  of  Crassus  and 
Cicero,  348.  Their  hollow  reconciliation, 
348.  Succeeds  Gabinus  in  the  government 
of  Syria,  353.  Sets  out  for  his  government, 
411.  Imprecations  of  Ateius  upon  him  as 
he  quits  Rome,  413.  Crosses  the  Eu- 
phrates, and  gains  some  trifling  successes, 
414.  Commits  various  acts  of  sacrilege, 
414.  Embassy  of  the  Parthians,  and  mu- 


INDEX. 


523 


tnal  defiance,  416.  Advice  of  Cassins  and 
Artabazes  regarding  the  conduct  of  the 
campaign,  41  f.  Different  routes  open  to 
him,  417.  Discouragement  of  his  army, 
411).  Misled  by  the  treachery  of  Abgarus, 
king  of  Osrhoene,  422.  Geographical  dif- 
ficulties of  Crassus’s  line  of  march,  423. 
Engages  the  Parthian  army,  424.  Death 
of  his  son,  424.  Takes  refuge  in  Carrhae, 
425.  Abandons  Carrhae,  426.  Dispersion 
of  his  army,  426.  Stratagem  of  Surenas 
to  engage  him  in  conference,  in  which  he 
is  murdered,  427.  His  standards  restored 
by  the  Parthians  to  Augustus,  iv.  116. 
Indignities  offered  to  his  remains,  i.  429. 
Reflections  on  the  death  of  the  Crassi, 
father  and  son,  430. 

Erassus,  Calpurnius,  conspires  against  Ner- 
va,  and  banished,  vii.  1 67. 

Orassus,  P.,  son  of  the  triumvir,  his  military 
education  under  Ctesar,  i.  264.  Sent  by 
him  to  demand  the  submission  of  the 
north-western  tribes  of  Gaul,  2S1.  Com- 
mands a legion  quartered  among  the  Andi, 
289.  Deputed  by  Caesar  to  prevent  the 
Aquitanians  from  joining  the  Gaulish 
insurgents,  291.  Hi's  campaign  in  Aqui- 
tania,  295.  Effects  its  reduction,  297. 
His  death  in  the  Parthian  war,  425.  The 
“Lausus”  of  Roman  History,  430.  His 
virtues,  430  note  -. 

Crastinus,  the  centurion,  his  speech  to 
Caesar  at  Pharsalia,  ii.  232. 

Cremona,  given  by  Octavius  to  his  legion- 
aries, iii.  177.  Sacked  and  burnt  by  the 
Flavians,  vi.  358. 

Cremutius  Cordus,  the  historian,  prosecuted 
by  clients  of  Sejanus,  v.  182.  Provokes 
his  judges  by  his  defence,  and  destroys 
himself.  183.  His  books  burnt,  but  some 
copies  of  them  preserved,  183.  Cains  Caesar 
permits  them  to  be  circulated  again,  289. 

Crete,  reduced  by  Q.  Metellus  Creticus,  i. 
140.  Importance  of  Crete  to  the  Romans, 
140.  Annexed  to  the  Cyrenaica  by  Me- 
tellus, iv.  93. 

Criminal  jurisdiction  of  the  people  and  of 
the  senate,  v.  107.  Overridden  by  the 
fixed  tribunals,  107.  The  appeal  transfer- 
red from  the  people  to  the  emperor,  108. 
Cognizance  of  charges  against  senators, 
108.  The  senate  under  the  empire  be- 
comes the  chief  court  of  criminal  juris- 
diction, 109.  Paramount  jurisdiction  of 
the  emperor  himself,  109. 

Orispinus,  Rufus,  proscribed,  vi.  162.  His 
death,  162. 

Crispus,  Q.,  places  himself  under  the  orders 
of  Cassius,  iii.  109. 

Crixus,  one  of  the  leaders  in  the  revolt  un- 
der Spartacus,  i.  51  note. 

Crowns,  naval,  of  the  Romans,  iii.  213. 

Ctesiphon,  city  of,  taken  by  Trajan,  vii.  305. 
The  palace  of,  burnt  by  Avidius  Priscus, 

^ 455. 

Cumae,  battle  between  the  Capsarians  and 
Pompeians  in  the  bay  of,  iii  194. 

Cumanus,  procurator  of  Judea,  rising  of  the 
Jews  in  his  time,  vi.  421. 

Cunobelinus,  king  of  the  Trinobantes,  coin- 
age of,  vi.  17.  His  power  in  southern  and 
eastern  Britain,  18. 


Curio,  family  of,  ii  52. 

Curio,  C.  Scribonius,  the  elder,  discloses  to 
Pompeius  the  plot  of  Vettius,  i.  174.  Al- 
lows the  justice  of  conceding  the  right  of 
citizenship  on  the  Transpadane  Gauls,  ii 
183. 

Curio,  C.  Scribonius,  the  younger,  saves 
Cfesar,  i.  124.  Implicated  in  the  accusa- 
tion of  Vettius,  174;  ii.  52.  Cicero’s  mis- 
taken opinion  of,  and  attachment  to  him, 
53.  His  character,  53.  Elected  tribune, 
59.  His  character  and  conduct,  71.  Goes 
over  to  Caesar.  71.  His  measures  on  Cae- 
sar’s behalf.  73.  Attempts  to  expel  him 
from  the  senate,  74.  Betakes  himself  to 
Caesar  at  Ravenna,  78.  Is  sent  by  Caesar 
with  an  offer  of  compromise  to  Rome,  80. 
His  second  flight  to  Caesar,  82,  88.  Takes 
the  place  of  Labienus  in  Cesar’s  confi- 
dence, and  expels  the  senatorian  troops 
from  Sardinia  and  Sicily,  121,  164.  His 
campaign,  defeat,  and  death  in  Africa, 
165-167. 

Curio,  son  of  the  tribune,  put  to  death  by 
Augustus,  iii.  258. 

Curiosolitse,  the,  compelled  to  submit  to 
the  Romans,  i.  2S1. 

Curius,  Q.,  his  unfounded  charge  against 
Caesar,  i.  143. 

Curule  magistracies,  offices  comprehended 
in  the  term,  i.  62  note . 

Customs  duties  under  the  empire,  iii.  424. 

Cybele,  worship  of,  among  the  Romans,  vi. 
200.  The  cult  of,  naturalized  at  Rome, 
vii.  121. 

Cynics,  banishment  of  the,  from  Rome,  vii. 
32. 

Cyprus,  its  important  position,  vii.  309. 
Sanguinary  outbreak  of  the  Jews  under 
Artemion,  309. 

Cyrenaica,  the  sanguinary  revolt  of  the  Jews 
in,  vii.  310. 

Cyrene,  attempt  of  Labienus  on,  ii.  283. 
Opens  its  gates  to  Cato,  283.  Given  by 
Antonius  to  his  daughter  Cleopatra  Se- 
lene, iii.  226.  Description  of  the  Cyren- 
aica in  the  time  of  Augustus,  iv.  93.  Popu- 
lation of  Cyrene  at  this  time,  342.  In- 
surrection of  the  Jews  in  Cyrene,  vii. 
309. 

Cyzicns  deprived  of  its  freedom  by  Au- 
gustus, iv.  106.  Its  commerce  in  the  time 
of  that  emperor,  360. 

DACIANS,  their  hostile  attitude  against 
Rome,  vii.  86.  Driven  beyond  the 
Ister  by  Fonteius  Agrippa.  S7.  The  same 
people  as  the  Geta?.  87, 1S2.  Domitians 
campaign  against  them,  S7.  Defeat  Fus- 
cus  and  are  defeated  by  Julianus,  88,  89. 
Send  an  envoy  to  Rome  to  treat  for  peace, 
90.  Their  first  war  with  Trajan,  181. 
Their  wealth  and  civilization,  182.  Their 
gold  and  silver  mines,  182.  Their  geo- 
graphical position,  182.  Their  predatory 
incursions,  182.  Sue  for  peace,  deliver  up 
their  arms,  and  send  envoys  to  Rome, 
187.  Their  second  war  with  Rome,  and 
defeat,  189, 196.  Dacia  becomes  a Roman 
province,  200.  Monuments  of  its  con- 
querors, 200.  Martius  Turbo  placed  in 
command  by  Hadrian,  333. 


524 


INDEX. 


Dalmatians,  revolt  cf  the,  quelled  by  Tibe- 
rius, iv.  187.  Causes  of  a subsequent 
rising  of  the,  246.  Subdued  by  Germani- 
cus,  254.  Number  of  legions  stationed  in 
Dalmatia  in  the  reign  of  Tiberius,  v.  142. 

Dancing  amongst,  the  Romans,  i.  84. 

Danube,  Roman  fortresses  on  the  banks  of, 
the,  iv.  177. 

Deceatre,  a Ligurian  tribe,  marked  out  for 
Roman  vengeance,  i.  195. 

Decebalus,  perhaps  the  same  as  Diurpaneus, 
king  of  the  Dacians,  vii.  87.  Meaning  of 
the  title,  87  note  2.  Forms  relations  with 
Pacorus  II.,  king  of  Parthia,  297.  Con- 
cludes peace  with  Domitian,  89,  90.  His 
residence  at  Zermizegethusa,  185.  Routed 
by  Trajan,  186.  Sues  for  peace,  and  forms 
an  alliance  with  the  Romans,  187.  Yields 
up  his  forts  and  goes  to  Rome,  187.  En- 
traps Cassius  Longinus  and  demands 
peace  as  the  price  of  his  liberty,  192.  His 
defeat  and  death,  193.  Discovery  of  his 
buried  treasure,  194. 

Decianus,  Catus,  procurator  in  Britain,  vi. 
44. 

Decidius  Saxa,  commands  a division  of  the 
triumvirs’  forces  in  Macedonia,  iii.  161. 
Slain  by  Q.  Labienus  in  Asia  Minor,  191. 

Declamation,  habits  of,  of  the  Romans,  iv. 
430 ; vi.  182.  The  schools  of  the  rhetori- 
cians, iv.  432.  M.  Annaeus  Seneca,  the 
rhetorician,  433.  Conventional  rules  for 
the  declaimers,  434. 

Dediticii,  the,  of  the  Roman  provincial 
population,  i.  35. 

Deiotarus,  king  of  Galatia,  his  reply  to 
Crassus,  i.  414.  Cicero  applies  to  him  for 
auxiliaries,  ii.  56.  Takes  the  side  of  Pom- 
eius  in  the  civil  war,  187.  Accompanies 
im  in  his  flight,  242.  Submits  to  Caesar 
and  brings  aid  to  Calvinus,  265,  272.  Offers 
to  assist  the  liberators  under  Cassius,  iii. 
109. 

Deiotarus,  king  of  Galatia,  son  of  the  fore- 
going, deserts  Antonius  for  Octavius,  iii. 
249. 

Deiotarus  Philadelphus,  king  of  Paphla- 
gonia,  favoured  by  Augustus,  iv.41. 

Delation,  Delators,  original  import  of  the 
word,  y.  130.  Augustus  institutes  the 
office  of  public  informer,  131.  Passion  of 
the  Romans  for  accusation,  132.  Delators 
encouraged  by  Tiberius,  136.  Proposal 
of  M.  Lepidus  for  diminishing  the  rewards 
of  the  delators,  181.  Tiberius  checks  de- 
lation, 182.  Its  progress,  201.  Not  em- 
ployed by  Caius,  304.  Method  adopted 
by  the  senate  for  checking  delation,  420. 
Domitian’s  encouragement  of  delators, 
vii.  127.  Character  of  his  delators,  129. 
Memmius  Regulus,  the  prince  of  dela- 
tors, 130.  The  delators  prosecuted  by 
Nerva,  163. 

ilellius,  Q.,  an  Antonine  officer,  goes  over 
to  Octavius,  iii.  250. 

Delos,  state  of,  in  the  time  of  Augustus,  iv. 

358. 

Delphi,  oracle  of,  in  the  time  of  Ctesar,  ii. 
217.  Consulted  by  Nero,  vi.  277. 

Demetrius,  freedman  of  Pompeius,  erects 
the  Pompeian  Theatre,  i.  345. 

Demetrius,  the  Cynic,  present  at  the  death 


of  Thrasea,  vi.  173.  Banished  b)  Vespa- 
sian, vii.  32. 

Democracy,  general  result  of  the  struggle 
between  the  aristocracy  and,  v.  96.  The 
balance  trimmed  by  the  tact  of  Augustus, 
97.  More  logical  character  of  the  policy 
of  Tiberius,  97. 

Derceto,  or  Atargatis,  treasures  of  the  tem- 
ple of,  seized  by  Crassus,  i.  415  note  L 

Diablintes,  the,  join  a maritime  confederacy 
against  the  Romans,  i.  290. 

Diana,  the  Arician,  strange  story  of  the 
priesthood  of,  v.  326. 

Didius  sent  to  Britain  by  Claudius,  vi.  88. 
Retains  without  extending  the  Roman 
possessions  in  Britain,  38,  39. 

Didius,  C.,  sent  by  Cassar  to  the  succour  of 
Trebonius  in  Spain,  ii.  806. 

Dido,  queen  of  Caithage,  pretended  dis- 
covery of  her  treasures,  vi.  154. 

Dion  Cassius,  his  estimate  of  the  character 
of  Hadrian,  vii.  391. 

Dion  Chrysostomus,  his  remarks  on  the 
uncertainty  of  Roman  history  from  the 
establishment  of  the  empire  quoted,  iv. 
57.  His  wanderings,  vii.  148.  Account 
of  his  history  and  writings,  365.  His 
“Oration  on  the  Alexandrians,”  376. 

Dionysius  the  circumnavigator,  accompanies 
Caius  Caesar  to  the  East,  iv.  214. 

Diribitorium,  or  Hall  of  Agrippa,  remains 
roofless,  vii.  118. 

Divico,  the  Helvetian  chieftain,  his  inter- 
view with  Ca?sar,  i.  248. 

Divine  service  among  the  Romans,  cere- 
monies of,  vi.  200. 

Divitiacus,  vergobret  of  the  ^Edui,  solicits 
the  aid  of  Rome,  i.  235.  His  character, 
235.  His  intimacy  with  Csesar  and  Cicero 
in  Rome,  i.  235.  Successfully  intercedes 
■with  Caesar  for  his  brother  Dumnorix,  250. 
Sets  forth  the  oppressions  of  the  Suevi, 
255.  His  usefulness  in  the  hands  of  the 
Romans,  266.  Assists  Caesar  in  his  second 
campaign  in  Gaul,  270.  At  his  interces- 
sion Caesar  pardons  the  Bellovaci,  271. 
Never  acquires  the  use  of  the  Latin  idiom, 
iv.  81. 

Dolabella,  Cn.  Cornelius,  impeached  by 
Caesar  for  malversation  in  his  province  of 
Macedonia,  i.  96. 

Dolabella,  P.,  son-in-law  of  Cicero,  com- 
mands the  Caesarian  naval  forces  off  llly- 
ricum,  ii.  169.  Defeated  by  Bibulus,  170. 
His  intrigues  repressed  by  Antonius,  270. 
Rebuked"  by  Caesar,  278.  Gratified  with  a 
command  in  Africa,  306.  Taken  by  Caesar 
with  him  into  Spain,  347.  Death  of  his 
divorced  wife  Tullia,  362.  Said  to  have 
conspired  against  Caesar's  life,  374.  Joins 
the  conspirators  after  Caesar’s  murder,  iii. 
16.  Appears  in  the  senate  with  the  consular 
fasces,  20.  Accepted  by  Antonius  as  his 
colleague  in  the  consulship,  46.  Applaud- 
ed by  the  nobles  for  his  zeal  in  suppress- 
ing the  Caesarian  outbreaks,  54.  The  gov- 
ernment of  Syria  obtained  by  Antonius  for 
him,  69,  78.  Proceeds  towards  Syria,  94. 
Seizes  and  murders  Trebonius,  110.  Pro- 
claimed an  enemy  of  the  state.  111.  Driv- 
en to  commit  suicide  at  Laodicea,  128. 

Dolabella,  proconsul  of  Africa,  pacifies  his 


INDEX. 


525 


province,  v.  1S5.  Joins  the  prosecution 
against  his  kinsman  Q.  Varus,  201. 

Domains,  the  public,  as  a source  of  revenue, 
iii.  419. 

Domitia  Lepida,  Nero’s  aunt,  usually  called 
Lepida,  wife  of  Valerius  Messala  and 
mother  of  Messalina,  has  the  charge  of 
Nero  during  his  mother’s  banishment; 
her  rivalry  with  Agrippina,  who  makes 
Claudius  put  her  to  death,  vi.  55. 

Domitia,  consort  of  Domitian,  her  in£rigu: 
with  the  mime  Paris,  vii  110.  Divorced 
but  taken  back.  111. 

Domitian,  son  of  Vespasian,  vi.  348.  Takes 
refuge  in  the  Capitol,  364,  868.  Title  of 
Ctcsar  conferred  on  him  by  the  Flavian 
traders;  influence  of  Antonius  Primus, 
873,  374.  Raised  to  the  praetorship,  376. 
Joins  the  forces  in  Gaul,  403.  Returns  to 
Pome,  410.  His  vices,  37S.  Seeks  to 
supplant  his  brother  Titus,  his  accession, 
education,  and  temper,  vii.  63-68.  Recalls 
Agricola,  77,  78.  Leads  an  expedition 
against  the  Chatti,  and  assumes  the  name 
of  Germanicus,  83.  Decreed  perpetual 
censor,  83.  His  confiscations,  84.  His 
war  with  the  Dacians,  89.  His  triumph, 
90.  His  triumphal  arch,  and  colonies, 

92,  93.  Appearance  of  a pretended  Nero, 

93.  Revolt  of  Antonius  Saturninus,  95. 
Domitian’s  terror  and  cruelties,  97.  His 
character  representative  of  the  age,  99. 
Evidence  against  him,  100.  Affects  refor- 
mation of  manners,  102.  His  zeal  for  the 
purity  of  the  vestal  virgins,  103.  His  en- 
forcement of  the  law  of  adultery,  of  the 
Scantinian  law,  and  of  the  laws  against 
mutilation,  106,  107.  His  edicts  against 
the  mimes,  astrologers,  and  philosophers, 
109-112.  Assumes  the  censorship,  and 
institutes  refoi ms,  113.  His  edict  respect- 
ing the  cultivation  of  the  vine,  115.  His 
buildings,  117.  Ascription  of  divine  hon- 
ours, 119, 120.  Disrespect  to  the  emperor 
treated  as  blasphemy,  121.  Proscription 
of  Jews  and  Christians,  125,  287.  En- 
courages delators,  128.  Favours  the  army 
and  the  populace,  131.  His  quinquen- 
nial contests  in  poetry,  eloquence,  and 
music  (Agon  Capitolinus),  133-135.  Takes 
Minerva  for  his  guardian,  135.  Patronizes 
men  of  letters,  136.  His  dissimulation 
and  moodiness,  139-143.  Accused  of  poi- 
soning Agricola,  145.  His  proscription  of 
nobles,  and  banishment  of  philosophers, 
146-148.  His  u reign  of  terror,”  149.  His 
danger  and  alarm,  150.  Omens  previous 
to  his  death,  151.  Assassinated,  154.  In- 
dignities heaped  on  his  memory,  162. 

Domitii,  Nero’s  ancestors,  family  character 
of  the,  vi.  52-55. 

Damitilla,  Domitian’s  niece,  banished  on  a 
cliszrge  of  Judaism,  vii.  126. 

Domitius.  consul,  his  treachery  to  Bituitus, 
i.  195. 

Domitius,  L.,  Ahenobarbus,  implicated  by 
Vettlus  in  a false  charge  of  conspiracy,  i 
175.  Put  forward  for  the  consulship,  331. 
Opposes  the  first  triumvirate,  331.  Can- 
didate for  the  consulship,  and  defeated, 
835,  338.  Elected,  353.  Rebukes  Gabi- 
;ius’  publican!  for  extortions,  353.  Ap- 


pointed Ca?sar’s  successor  in  Further 
Gaul,  ii.  86.  Occupies  Corfinium,  102, 
103.  Besieged,  suirenders,  and  is  gen- 
erously treated  by  Caesar,  104-106.  His 
ferocity,  107,  117.  Defends  Massilia,  127, 
129, 142.  Escapes,  173.  Joins  Pompeius, 
and  is  held  in  high  estimation  among  the 
nobles,  190.  Aspires  to  become  Pontifex 
Maximus,  and  proposes  sentence  of  death 
against  all  senators  who  did  not  join  Pom- 
peius, 226,  227.  Commands  the  left  wing 
at  the  battls  of  Pharsalia,  230.  Slain  in 
the  pursuit,  238,  250.  His  praise  by  Lu- 
can, 238. 

Domitius  Afer,  the  orator,  a delator,  prose- 
cutes Quintilius  Varus,  v.  201.  His  ora- 
tory, 412  note  *.  His  death,  412  note  i 

Domitius  Cn.,  Calvinus,  a candidate  for 
the  consulship,  i.  360.  Elected  consul  in 
the  seventh  month  of  the  year,  433.  Mas- 
ter of  the  horse  to  Caesar,  ii.  366.  Main- 
tains a republican  armament  in  the  Ionian 
Gulf;  iii.  179.  Joins  Antonius  against 
Octavius,  182.  Becomes  consul,  and  takes 
part  with  Antonius,  238.  Abandons  Rome, 
and  repairs  to  Antonius,  240.  His  defec- 
tion and  death,  249. 

Domitius,  son  of  the  preceding,  commands 
the  legions  in  Germany,  iv.  236. 

Domitius,  Cn.  Ahenobarbus,  marries  Agrip- 
pina, daughter  of  Germanicus,  v.  250. 
His  son  Nero  ( see  Nero).  His  statue  set 
up  in  the  senate,  vi.  S4. 

Domitius,  Cn.,  Corbulo,  commands  the  le- 
gions in  the  East,  under  Nero,  vi.  121. 

Dorilaus,  prince  of  Galatia,  takes  the  side  of 
Pompeius  in  the  civil  war,  ii.  187, 188. 

Drappes,  a Gaulish  chieftain,  attacks  the 
provinces,  ii.  37.  Shuts  himself  up  in 
Uxellodunum,  37.  Compelled  to  surren- 
der to  Caesar,  37. 

Druidism,  invention  of,  claimed  by  the 
Kymry  of  Britain,  i.  221.  The  meeting- 
place  of  the  whole  of  the  Gallic  tribes, 
222.  Essentially  Oriental  character  of 
the  Druidical  system,  222.  Existing  men* 
numents  of  Druidism  in  Gaul,  224.  All- 
powerful  authority  of  the  Druids  among 
the  Carnutes,  ii.  35.  The  Druids  discoun- 
tenanced by  Augustus,  iv.  83.  Their  dis- 
content, 85.  Our  scanty  knowledge  of 
Druidism,  vi.  9.  Disgust  and  suspicion 
with  which  it  was  regarded  by  the  Ro- 
mans, 10.  Its  centres,  temples,  rites,  and 
ceremonies,  10.  Proscribed  by  Augustus, 
Tiberius,  and  Claudius,  12.  Its  talisman, 
“the  serpent’s  egg,”  12.  Retreat  of  the 
Druids  to  Anglesey,  41.  Destruction  of 
them  and  of  their  sacred  groves,  by  Sueto- 
nius Paullinus,  42.  Scorn  thrown  by  Lu- 
can on  the  Druidical  doctrine  of  transmi- 
gration, 244  note  i Triumphant  anticipa- 
tions of  the  Druids  in  a.d.  69,  399. 

Drusilla,  daughter  of  Germanicus ; marines 
Cassius  Longinus,  v.  250, 305.  And  again 
to  M.  Lepidus,  305.  Passion  of  her  broth- 
er Cains  for  her,  and  extravagant  grief  at 
her  death,  305. 

Drusilla,  daughter  of  Herod  Agrippa,  vi 
419.  Married  to  the  prince  of  Emesa,  but 
carried  off  by  Felix,  procurator  of  Judea, 
423. 


526 


INDEX. 


Drusus,  son  of  Germanicns  and  Agrippina, 
alfection  of  his  cousin  Drusus  for  him,  v. 
ICC.  Commended  by  Tiberius  to  the  sen- 
ate, 177.  Lays  himself  open  to  the  mach- 
inations of  Sejanus,  203.  Retained  by 
Tiberius  at  Capreae,  216.  Ilis  disgrace 
obtained  by  Sejanus,  216.  Sent  to  Rome 
and  placed  under  arrest,  216.  Order  to 
Macro  respecting  him,  223.  H/s  horrible 
sufferings  and  death,  236,  237. 

Drusus,  a pretender,  arrested  and  executed, 
y 235. 

Dru^js,  younger  son  of  Tiberius  Drusus 
and  Livia,  iii.  218  note'.  His  war  with 
the  Rha*tians,  Brenni,  and  Genauni,  iv. 
160.  His  character,  173.  Administers 
the  Gaulish  provinces,  174  Consecrates 
an  altar  to  Augustus  at  Lugdunum,  175. 
Invades  Germany  by  sea  and  land,  178. 
His  canal  between  the  Rhine  and  Lake 
Flevus  (Zuyder  Zee),  179.  Failure  of  his 
first  expedition,  180.  His  second  cam- 
paign, 180.  Erects  the  fort  of  Aliso  on 
the  Lippe,  181.  Obtains  an  ovation,  131. 
His  third  campaign  and  death,  184.  Mon- 
ument to  him  at^Moguntiacum,  185.  His 
remains  brought  to  Rome,  186.  Received 
by  Augustus,  who  pronounces  his  funeral 
oration  and  places  his  ashes  in  the  Mau- 
soleum Augusti,  186.  His  campaigns  par- 
tially unsuccessful,  but  permanent  in 
their  results,  186, 1S7. 

Drusus,  Tiberius  Claudius,  youngest  son  of 
the  preceding.  See  Claudius. 

Drusus,  son  of  Tiberius  and  Vipsania,  intro- 
duced by  his  father  to  the  citizens  in  the 
forum,  iv.  236.  Pronounces  the  funeral 
oration  over  the  body  of  Augustus,  v.  15. 
Date  of  his  birth  uncertain,  23.  Sent  to 
quell  the  meeting  of  the  Pannonian  legions, 
19.  Sent  to  lllyricum,  52.  Lives  in  amity 
with  Germanicus,  53.  Etfects  the  ruin  of 
Maroboduus,  54.  His  wife  Livilla  has  two 
sons  at  a birth,  73.  Meets  the  funeral 
procession  of  Germanicus,  73.  His  blunt 
demeanour,  78.  Consul  with  his  father 
Tiberius,  164.  His  character,  166.  The 
tribunitian  power  conferred  on  him  in 
conjunction  with  his  father,  171.  Machi- 
nations of  Sejanus  against  him ; their  mu- 
tual hostility,  175.  Poisoned  by  Sejanus 
and  Livilla,  176. 

Drusus,  son  of  Claudius,  v.  399. 

Ducenarii,  duties  of  the,  iii.  401. 

Dumnorix,  the  iEduan,  succeeds  his  brother 
Divitiacus  as  vergobret,  i.  239.  Won  over 
by  the  Helvetian  Orgetorix,  239,  245.  His 
life  spared  by  Cassar,  250.  Commands  the 
auxiliary  cavalry  under  Caesar,  251.  His 
restless  intrigues,  268,  385.  Ilis  death, 
385. 

Duras,  or  Diurpaneus,  chief  of  the  Dacians, 
perhaps  the  same  as  Decebalus,  vii.  87. 
See  Decebalus. 

Dnratius,  a chief  of  the  Pictones,  holds  the 
city  of  l^emonum  for  the  Romans,  ii.  36. 

Durocortorum,  assembly  of  Gaulish  tribes 
convened  by  Caj*aT  at,  i.  405. 

Duumviri  perduellonis,  i.  107  note's. 

Dyrrachium,  Cicero’s  residence  at,  i.  319. 
Its  importance  as  a place  of  commerce, 
320. 


Earthenware  of  the  ancients,  iv.  sit. 

Earthquake,  destroys  twelve  cities  of 
Lesser  Asia.  v.  146.  One  in  Rome  in  a.f. 
800,  449.  Pompeii  partly  destroyed  by 
one,  vii.  57.  The  great  earthquake  at  An- 
tioch in  a.d.  115,  299. 

Eboracum,  or  York,  importance  of,  at  the 
time  of  the  Roman  dominion,  vii.  345. 
Eburones,  their  counln  overrun  by  the 
Cimbri  and  Teutones,  i.  202.  Their  char- 
acter in  the  time  of  Caesar,  225.  Join  the 
confederacy  against  the  Romans,  267. 
Destroy  two  Roman  legions,  393.  Attack 
Q.  Cicero’s  camp,  394.  Routed  by  Caesar, 
396. 

“Eclogues”  of  Yirgil,  remarks  on  the,  iv. 
440. 

Edessa,  city  of,  capital  of  the  kingdom  of 
Osrhoene,  i.  418. 

Edicts  of  Augustus,  iii.  377.  Character  of 
the  perpetual  edicts  of  the  praetors,  vii. 
426.  And  of  the  provincial  edicts  of  the 
prefects,  426. 

Education,  system  of,  of  the  Romans,  inde- 
pendent of  priests  or  magistrates,  vi.  180. 
Its  extent  and  liberality,  180.  High  train- 
ing of  public  men  at  Rome  under  the  free 
state,  181.  Not  materially  lower  under 
the  empire,  181.  Declamation,  182.  Free- 
dom of  writing,  183.  Liberality  of  Vespa- 
sian, vii.  28. 

Egnatius  Rufus,  charged  with  conspiracy 
against  the  life  of  Augustus,  iv.  137. 
Egypt,  claims  of  the  Roman  republic  to  the 
kingdom  of,  i.  105.  Application  of  Ptole- 
mauis  Auletes,  king  of  Egypt,  for  restora- 
tion to  his  kingdom,  327.  Competition  of 
Roman  nobles  for  the  commission  to  settle 
Egyptian  affairs,  328.  Accession  of  Ptole- 
mams  XII.  and  his  sister  Cleopatra,  ii.  243. 
Their  quarrels,  244.  Caesar's  arrival  in 
Egypt,  253.  Object  of  his  interference  in 
the  affairs  of  this  country,  254.  The  bat- 
tle of  the  Nile,  263.  The  Ptolemies  per- 
mitted by  the  Romans  to  reign  in  Egypt, 
iii.  278.  Reduced  by  Octavius  to  the  form 
of  a province  under  his  own  control,  279. 
Resources  of  Egypt  under  the  last  of  the 
Ptolemies,  280.  First  political  intercom  ac 
of  the  Romans  with  Egypt,  iv.  94.  Its 
rapid  reduction  by  them,  94.  Neglect  of 
the  resources  and  defences  of  Egypt  by 
the  later  Ptolemies,  101.  Improvements 
of  the  prefect  Petronius,  102.  Who  defends 
the  province  from  an  attack  of  the  Ethio- 
pians, 102.  iElius  Gallus  appointed  pre- 
fect, 103.  The  corn-fleets  of  Egypt,  315. 
Population  of  Egypt  at  the  time  of  Au- 
gustus, 342.  Egyptian  rites  in  Rome  sup- 
pressed by  Tiberius,  v.  150;  vi.  202.  Ex- 
ploration of  the  country  900  miles  above 
Syene  in  the  reign  of  Nero,  vi.  268.  Severe 
measures  against  the  Jews  in  Egypt,  vii. 
284.  Jewish  insurrection  in  the  ieign  of 
Trajan,  309-311. 

Eleazar,  a chief  of  the  Zealots  in  Jerusalem, 
vi.  429.  His  revolutionary  proceedings, 
448.  Occupies  the  inner  enclosure  of  the 
Temple,  449.  Assassinated,  450. 
Elements,  Syrian  worship  of  the,  attractive 
to  the  lower  order  of  women  at  Eom<\ 
vi.  199. 


INDEX. 


527 


Elephants,  use  of,  in  battle  in  Africa,  ii.  293. 
Honour  of  riding  an  elephant  in  Rome, 

iii.  200. 

Ennia,  wife  of  Macro,  and  mistress  of  Caius 
Caesar,  v.  253.  Compelled  by  Caius  to 
destroy  herself,  302,  303. 

Ennius,  Q.,  introduces  the  poetry  of  Greece 
into  Rome,  ii.  402. 

Ennius,  a knight,  denounced  for  converting 
an  image  of  the  emperor  into  plate  for  his 
table,  and  acquitted,  v.  127. 

Ephesus,  temple  of,  plundered  by  Scipio, 
ii.  215.  Saved  by  Caesar  from  a second 
spoliation,  253.  The  principal  metropolis 
of  Lower  Asia,  iv.  105.  Limits  of  the  sacred 
precincts  of  the  temple  at  various  periods, 
106.  State  of  Ephesus  in  the  time  of  Au- 
gustus, 360. 

Epicadus,  his  conspiracy  1 o carry  off  Agrippa 
Posthumus  and  Julia  from  their  places  of 
exile,  iv.  256. 

Epicharis,  a Grecian  freedwoman,  active  in 
Piso’s  conspiracy,  vi.  147.  Arrested,  147. 
Her  fortitude  and  suicide,  149. 

Epictetus  teaches  at  Nicopolis  in  Epirus, 
vii.  148. 

Epicureanism,  great  principle  of,  ii.  852.  Its 
fatal  influence  upon  the  principles  of  faith 
and  morals,  401.  Character  of  the  Epicu- 
reans in  the  time  of  Trajan,  vii.  254. 

Epidamnus,  an  ancient  name  of  Dyrrachium, 
i.  320. 

Epigrams,  Latin,  vii.  231. 

4i  Epistles  from  the  Euxine”  of  Ovid,  re- 
marks on  the,  v.  462. 

Epulones,  duties  of  the,  iii  371. 

Era,  the  Julian,  establishment  of  the,  ii.  340. 

Esquiline  Hill,  the,  i.  18;  iv.  370,  375.  Gar- 
dens of  Maecenas  on  the,  19S. 

Ethiopians,  the,  attack  Egypt,  iv.  102.  De- 
feated by  Petronius,  102.  Released  by 
Augustus  from  payment  of  a tribute,  103. 

Etna,  eruption  of,  in  b.o.  32,  iii.  239  note  >. 

Etruscans,  their  preparations  against  Rome, 

i.  190.  Invasion  of  Etruria  by  the  Gauls, 
190.  Perfidy  of  the  Gauls,  190.  Coalition 
of  the  Etruscans  with  the  Samnites,  Um- 
brians, and  Cisalpine  Gauls,  190.  Defeat 
of  the  coalition  at  Sentinum,  191.  The 
ruling  idea  of  the  Etruscan  institutions, 

ii.  394.  Internal  corruption  of  the  Etrus- 
cans, 398. 

Euhemerus,  the  *Iepa  *Ai mypa^tj  of,  trans- 
lated into  Latin  by  Ennius,  ii.  402. 

Exedares,  son  of  Pactorus  II.,  king  of  Par- 
thia,  placed  on  the  throne  of  Armenia,  vii. 
298.  Dethroned  by  his  uncle  Chosroes, 
298. 

Excise  duties  under  the  empire,  iii.  424. 


FABERIUS,  one  of  Caesar’s  secretaries,  his 
forgeries,  iii.  51. 

Fabicius,  C.,  ordered  by  Caesar  to  occupy 
the  passes  of  the  Pyrenees,  ii.  130.  His 
spirited  advance  to  the  valley  of  the 
Sicoris,  133.  Granted  a triumph,  357. 
Fabius  Maximus,  defeats  the  Allobroges  and 
Arverni,  i.  196.  Chosen  princeps  of  the 
senate,  iii.  353. 

Fabius  Maximus,  his  death,  iv.  282. 

Fabius  fianga,  patron  of  the  Allobroges,  per- 


suades them  to  reveal  Catilina’s  conspi- 
racy to  Cicero,  i.  210. 

Fadus,  Cuspius,  the  first  procurator  of  Judea, 

vi.  420. 

Falanius,  a knight,  charged  with  constructive 
treason,  v.  125. 

Fannius,  C.,  covets  the  villa  of  Atticus,  ii. 
225.  Joins  Sextus  Pompeius,  but  finally 
abandons  him,  iii.  204. 

Fannius,  C.,  his  work  on  the  victims  of  Nero, 
the  “ Exitus  Occisorum  aut  Relegator um, 11 

vii.  244. 

Fannius,  his  paper  manufactory  in  Rome, 

iv.  316  note. 

“ Fasti  ” of  Ovid,  remarks  on  the,  iv.  463. 
Faustina,  Annia,  daughter  of  Antoninus 
Pius,  married  to  M.  Aurelius,  vii.  396, 409. 
Her  infidelity,  468.  Her  death,  473. 
Faustina,  Annia  Galeria,  wife  of  Antoninus 
Pius,  vii.  396.  Her  licentious  character, 
409.  Her  endowments  for  orphans,  409. 
Faustus  Sulla,  son  of  the  dictator ; joins 
Cato  at  Patrae,  ii.  283.  Slain  in  Africa, 
302,  303. 

Favonius,  C.,  leads  the  oligarchy  against 
Caesar,  i.  342.  Joins  the  conspirators  in 
the  Capitol,  iii.  12. 

Favonius,  M.,  “Cato’s  shadow,”  i.  151.  Op- 
poses the  prolongation  of  Caesar’s  com- 
mand, 343.  Commands  a detachment  of 
the  Pompeian  army  in  Macedonia,  ii.  216. 
His  remark  on  the  protraction  of  the  war, 
225.  Accompanies  Pompeius  in  his  flight, 
242.  Joins  the  liberators,  iii.  12,  70. 

Favor  in  us,  the  rhetorician,  and  the  emperor 
Hadrian,  story  of,  vii.  340. 

Felix,  brother  of  Pallas,  procurator  of  Judea, 

v.  451 ; vi.  206  note  2 423,  424.  Compara- 
tive tranquillity  of  the  country  during  his 
government,  423.  His  career,  423. 

Fenius  Rufus,  praetorian  prefect,  vi.  118.  A 
friend  of  Agrippina’s,  119.  Takes  part  in 
I*iso’s  conspiracy,  145.  His  treachery  and 
condemation,  149. 

Festivals,  sacred,  administration  of  the,  iii. 
371. 

Festus,  Porcius,  his  government  of  Judea, 

vi.  424. 

Fidena?,  fall  of  an  amphitheatre  at,  v.  200. 
Finances  of  Rome,  iii.  417.  Objects  of  pub- 
lic expenditure  under  the  commonwealth, 
417.  And  under  the  empire,  417  Sources 
of  revenue,  410-420.  Taxes,  424.  The 
public  agrarium  and  the  emperor’s  fiscus, 
425. 

Fires  in  ancient  Rome,  iv.  407 ; vi.  128. 
Great  fire  on  the  Caelian  hill,  v.  201.  The 
Great  Fire  in  the  reign  of  Hero,  vi.  128- 
137.  The  fire  in  the  reign  of  Titus,  vii. 
50. 

Firmus,  Plotius,  chosen  prefect  of  the  prae- 
torians, vii.  312.  His  proposal  to  Otho, 
336. 

Fiscus  of  the  emperor,  and  the  public  a±ra- 
rium,  iii.  425. 

Fisheries,  revenue  derived  from,  iii.  423. 
Flaccus,  Avilius,  Roman  Governor  at  Alex- 
andria, insults  the  Jews,  and  causes  a riot, 
v.  310.  His  disgrace,  311. 

Flaccus,  Fulvius,  his  wars  against  the  Salyi, 
i.  196, 

Flaccus,  Verrius,  his  school  in  Rome,  vi.  58. 


528 


INDEX. 


Flaminian  Circus,  speeches  of  Pompeius, 
Crassus,  and  Cicero  delivered  in  the,  i. 
150. 

Flaminian  Way,  ii.  100 ; iv.  3S6. 

Flaminius  wounded  by  the  Ligurians,  i.  195. 

Flavian  or  Antonine  period  of  Roman  his- 
tory, character  of  the,  vii.  7.  Moral  aspect 
of  the  Flavian  reaction,  220.  Effect  of  this 
reaction  on  the  tone  of  Roman  literature, 
222. 

Flavius,  the  renegade  brother  of  Arminius, 

v.  38.  Their  parley  across  the  Weser,  88. 
His  son  Italicus  made  king  of  the  Cherusci, 

vi.  13. 

Flavius  put  to  death  by  Domitian,  for  his 
Judaism  or  Christianity,  his  sons  educated 
by  Quintilian,  vii.  126. 

Flavius,  the  tribune,  his  agrarian  bill,  i.  1G0. 
Throws  the  consul  Metellus  into  prison, 
162. 

Flavus  Subrius,  claims  the  honour  of  assas- 
sinating Nero,  vi.  146. 

Flevus,  Lake  (Zuyder  Zee),  canal  of  Drusus 
from,  to  the  Rhine,  iv.  179. 

Florus,  Gessius,  appointed  procurator  of 
Judea,  vi.  425.  Sends  to  Jerusalem  a 
force  which  capitulates  and  is  massacred, 
42S.  The  governor  of  Syria,  Cestius  Gal- 
lus.  defeated  before  the  city,  426.  Death 
of  Florus  in  consequence,  427. 

Florus,  Julius,  the  Gaul,  heads  a revolt 
against  the  Romans,  v.  167.  Defeated,  he 
falls  upon  his  sword,  168. 

Fonteius,  proconsul  in  Transalpine;  de- 
fended by  Cicero  against  the  complaints  of 
the  Gauls,  i.  73.  Impeached  for  malver- 
sation, and  defended  by  Cicero,  208. 

Fonteius  Capito,  commander  of  Lower  Ger- 
many, claims  the  empire,  vi.  266.  His 
death,  295. 

Fonteius  Agrippa  expel3  the  Dacians  from 
Ma?sia,  vii.  86. 

Foreigners,  antipathy  of  the  Romans  to,  i.  19. 

Forests,  revenue  derived  from,  iii.  423. 

Fortresses  of  the  Romans  in  the  provinces, 

vii.  445. 

Forum  Boarium  described,  iv.  3S4. 

Forum  Gallorum,  battle  between  the  Re- 
publicans and  Antonians  at,  iii.  117. 

Forum  Hadriani,  colony  of,  founded,  vii.  343, 

Forum  Julii,  foundation  of  the,  ii.  68.  Dedi- 
cation of  the,  313. 

Forum  Julii,  junction  of  the  forces  of  An- 
tonius  and  Lepidus  at,  iii.  126. 

Forum  Roman um  described,  iv.  380.  Its 
enlargement  and  decoration,  382.  The 
forum  of  the  Caesars,  383.  Assassination 
of  the  Emperor  Galba  in  the,  vi.  311.  The 
new  forum  of  the  Emperor  Yespasian,  vii. 
27.  The  equestrian  colossus  of  Domitian 
in  the  forum,  91. 

Forum,  the  Ulpian,  account  of  the,  vii  201. 

Franchise,  Latin  See  Latin  Franchise. 

Freedmen,  wealth  of,  under  the  republic,  iv. 
158.  Regimen  of  the  freedmen  under 
Claudius,  v.  402.  Triumph  of  the  sena- 
tors over  the  freedmen,  vii.  436. 

Frisil,  the,  compelled  to  become  allies  of 
the  Romans  under  Drusis.  iv.  181,  266. 
Join  the  revolt  under  Civilis,  vi.  387. 

Frontinus,  Julius,  his  government  of  Britain, 
vii.  70. 


Fronto,  Cornelius,  attends  M.  Aurelius  as  an 
adviser,  vii.  460. 

Fucinus,  Lake,  drained  by  Claudius,  v.  392. 
Spectacle  of  a sea-light  on  the  lake,  395. 

Futian  law  repealed,  i.  179. 

Fulcinius  Trio,  obtrudes  himself  into  the 
prosecution  of  Cn.  Piso,  v.  79,  82.  Ac- 
cuses Libo  Drusus,  90. 

Fulvia,  wife  successively  of  P.  Clodius,  the 
younger  Curio,  and  M.  Antonius,  ii.  347 
Her  daughter  Clodia  married  to  Octavius, 
iii.  141.  Her  fiendish  influence  over  An- 
tonius, 155.  Her  ferocity  towards  Cicero’s 
remains,  143.  Incites  L.  Antonius  to  rise 
against  Octavius,  178.  Flies  to  Athens, 
181.  Dies  at  Sicyon,  182. 

Furius  Camillas.  See  Camillas. 

Fuscus,  Cornelius,  pra?torian  prefect,  routed 
and  slain  in  the  Dacian  war,  vii.  88, 140. 


GABINIUS,  A.,  author  of  the  Lex  Gabinia, 
investing  Pompeiuswith  the  command 
of  the  Mediterranean  coasts,  i.  74,  176. 
His  dancing,  84.  Elected  consul,  176. 
His  scornful  treatment  of  Cicero,  183. 
Clodius  assigns  to  him  the  province  of 
Syria.  305,  306.  Detached  from  Clodius 
by  Pompeius,  321.  Attacked  by  Cicero 
in  his  speech  de  Provinciis  Conmlari- 
bu.%  337.  Recalled  in  consequence,  337. 
His  transactions  in  Syria,  349.  Resolves 
to  restore  Ptolemieus  Auletes  to  the 
throne  of  Egypt,  349.  Supports  Hyrcanus 
in  Judea,  and  chastises  the  Arabs,  350. 
Obtains  the  title  of  Imperator,  but  is  re- 
fused a supplication,  350.  Restores  Ptole- 
mams  Auletes,  352;  ii.  188.  Succeeded 
by  Crassus,  353.  Threatened  with  im- 
peachment by  L.  Domitius,  353.  Im- 
peached and  acquitted,  354-356.  Accused 
of  extortion  in  Syria  and  defended  bv 
Cicero,  condemned  and  banished,  356 
Returns  to  Rome,  ii.  132.  Joins  Ccusar 
266.  His  death  at  Salona.  266. 

Gadara,  its  contributions  to  Greek  science, 
iii.  294. 

Gades  the  temple  of  Hercules  at,  rifled  by 
Yarro,  ii.  161.  Entrusted  to  the  care  of 
C.  Gallonius,  161.  Gallonius  driven  out 
by  the  citizens,  162.  Upon  whom  the 
Latin  franchise  is  conferred  by  Cajsar, 
163. 

Galatia,  colonization  of,  i.  188.  Taken  by 
Augustus  and  formed  into  a province,  iv. 
110. 

Gael,  the,  contrasted'  with  the  Kymry,  i. 
217-219. 

Gallia  Cisalpiua,  i.  32.  Regarded  with  jeal- 
ousy by  the  Romans,  32.  The  government 
of,  coveted,  35. 

Galba,  Servius  Sulp.,  entrusted  by  the  sen- 
ate with  the  command  in  Gaul,  v.  354. 
Confirmed  in  his  command  by  Claudius, 
378.  His  family  and  character;  offered 
the  empire  on  the  death  of  Caius,  vi.  279. 
Prediction  of  Augustus  that  he  will  be 
emperor,  280.  Declared  Imperator  by  his 
soldiers.  281.  Accepted  by  the  senate, 
293.  His  severity  and  unpopularity  on 
entering  Rome,  295.  Assumes  the  consul- 
ship, 296.  Adopts  Piso  as  his  colleague. 


INDEX. 


529 


208.  "Refuses  his  soldiers  a donative,  301. 
Offends  the  Romans  by  sparing  Tigellinus, 
802.  His  parsimony,  302.  Otho  conspires 
against  him,  306.  Deserted  by  his  soldiers, 
307.  His  irresolution  and  death,  308-310. 
His  character  as  a proconsul  and  Roman 
soldier,  312.  Rounds  the  colony  of  Au- 
gusta Trevirorum  on  the  Moselle,  387. 

Gaiba,  Servius,  a Caesarean  officer  in  Gaul, 
his  campaign  in  the  Valais,  i.  286.  Takes 
Octodurus,  capital  of  the  V eragri,  287.  His 
failure  and  retreat  inio  the  province,  289. 

<1  ilba,  a senator,  killed  by  Caesar's  mutinous 
soldiers,  ii.  282. 

Qaleria,  wile  of  Vitellius,  left  with  her  chil- 
dren at  Rome,  vi.  830,  340  note  K Her 
moderation  in  prosperity,  343. 

Galerianus,  son  of  Piso  Lieinianus,  put  to 
death  by  Mucianus  vi.  376. 

Galerius  Trachalus,  consul  at  the  death  of 
N ero,  vi.  292. 

Galgacus,  his  battle  with  Agricola,  vii,  74. 

Galilee,  insurrection  in,  put  down  by  Quad- 
ratus,  prefect  of  Syria,  vi.  422.  Operations 
of  Vespasian  in  Galilee,  429.  The  defence 
of  the  country  entrusted  to  Josephus, 
430. 

GallioM.  Junius  (the  Gillio  of  Acts  xviii. 
12),  vi.  162  note  >. 

Gallonius,  C.,  entrusted  by  Varro  with  the 
care  of  Gades,  ii.  161. 

Gallus,  iElius,  his  expedition  against  the 
Arabians,  iv.  97-101.  * Appointed  by  Au- 
gustus prefect  of  Egypt,  101. 

Gallus,  Asinius,  marked  by  Augustus 
among  the  competitors  for  empire,  v.  10. 
Marries  Vipsania,  the  divorced  wife  of 
Tiberius ; his  long  imprisonment,  and  ex- 
ceu'.An,  217. 

Gallus,  Cestius.  See  Cestius. 

Gallus,  Cornelius,  refuses  to  admit  Antonius 
into  Pnetonium,  iii.  263.  Appointed  by 
Octavius  to  the  government  of  Egypt, 
279.  Jealousy  of  Augustus  of  him,  his 
literary  character,  disgrace,  and  suicide, 
iv.  52. 

Gallus,  Herennius,  sent  by  Hordeonius 
against  the  revolted  legions  and  beaten, 
vi.  391.  Beaten  by  his  soldiers,  393.  Kill- 
ed by  them,  398. 

Gallus,  Nonius,  legatus  in  the  Spanish  war, 
iv.  62.  Defeats  the  Treviri,  70. 

Gallus,  Publius,  interdicted  fire  and  water 
by  Nero,  vi.  159. 

Games  of  chance,  Augustus’s  fondness  for, 
iv.  228. 

Games,  quinquennial,  ofNeapolis,  iv.  363. 

Games  of  the  circus.  See  Circus. 

Ganjmedes  assassinates  Achillas  the  Egyp- 
tian general,  ii.  260.  His  tyranny  in 
Alexandria,  262. 

Cardens  of  Maecenas,  on  theEsquiline  Hill, 
iv.  198.  The  gardens  of  Rome,  409. 

Gauls,  rumours  of  their  commotions  in  b.  o. 
CO,  i.  162.  Their  early  conquests  in  Europe 
aftd  Asia,  187.  Their  coalition  with  the 
Italians,  190.  Defeated  at  Sentinum,  191. 
Coalesce  with  Hannibal,  192.  Cisalpine 
Gaul  reduced  to  a province  of  Rome,  192. 
Destroy  Placentia,  under  Hamilcar,  192. 
Transalpine  Gaul  formed  into  a province, 
196.  Overrun  by  the  Cimbri  and  Teu- 
138  VOL.  VII.- 


tones,  201.  Oppressed  by  the  Romans, 
the  Transalpines  side  with  the  Marians, 
207.  The  conquest  of  Gaul  a distinct  epi- 
sode in  Roman  history,  211.  Sources  of 
its  ethnology,  and  quadruple  division  of 
its  races,  212.  Origin  of  the  Gauls  proper, 
213.  Nations  forming  the  great  confedera- 
tion of  the  Galli,  214."  Their  division  into 
the  Gael  and  Kymry,  physiologically  dis- 
tinguished, 216,  217.  Further  marks  of 
their  distinction,  21S-224.  Their  religious 
ideas,  221.  The  Gallic  territory  pene- 
trated in  the  south  by  some  of  the  Belgic 
tribes,  227.  Hostility  between  the  Gauls 
and  Germans,  227.  Their  general  char- 
acter and  population,  227.  Their  eagerness 
to  pay  their  court  to  Ca?sar  after  his  vic- 
tory over  the  Helvetii,  254.  Apply  to 
Ca*sar  for  aid  against  the  Suevi,  253-256. 
Delivered  by  him,  261.  Review  of  the 
state  of  Gaul  after  C?esaiJs  first  campaign, 
265.  The  Romans  and  Gauls  compared  in 
a military  point  of  view,  2S2-285.  Ordi- 
nary route  of  the  Roman  armies  into  Gaul, 
287-  State  of  Gaul  in  b.  c.55,  287.  Caesar’s 
fourth  campaign,  287.  General  spirit  of  dis- 
affection of  the  Gauls,  390.  Revolt  under 
Indutiomarus,  397.  Caesar’s  lenience  to  the 
conquered  states,  ii.  7.  The  Gaulish  demo- 
cracies favourably  disposed  to  him,  9. 
Wealth  of  the  Gauls,  10,  Flatter  them- 
selves with  revived  hopes  of  recovering 
their  independence,  11.  Fresh  disturb- 
ances, 11-13.  Their  formation  of  an  ex- 
tensive confederacy  under  Vercingetorix, 
12.  Change  their  plan  of  warfare,  and 
destroy  their  towns,  16, 17.  Are  defeated, 
29.  Their  camp  at  Alesia  broken  up,  29- 
32.  Further  disturbances,  35.  Final  pa- 
cification of  Gaul,  and  results  of  Ctesar's 
Gallic  war,  39.  Pictures  from  the  ancient 
writers  of  the  state  to  which  Gaul  was 
reduced,  39.  Capsar’s  conciliatory  treat- 
ment of  the  Gauls,  66  Progress  of  Roman 
sentiments  in  Gaul,  114.  Full  citizenship 
obtained  by  Caesar  for  the  Transpadane 
Gauls,  183.  Affairs  of  Gaul  after  the  final 
departure  of  Caesar,  iv.  69.  Pacification 
of  the  Aquilanians,  the  Treviri,  and  the 
Morini,  70,  71.  Harsh  treatment  of  the 
Gauls  during  the  triumvirate,  71.  Policy 
of  Augustus  in  the  organization  of  Gaul, 
72.  Organization  of  the  provincia  Nar- 
bonensis,  73.  The  provincia  Lugdunen- 
sis,  75.  Extent  to  which  self-government 
was  accorded  to  the  Gaulish  states,  76. 
Functions  of  their  popular  assemblies,  79. 
Political  importance  of  the  military  roads, 
79.  Progress  of  Roman  civilization  in 
Gaul,  83.  The  Druids  discountenanced 
by  Augustus,  83.  Introduction  of  the 
Roman  polytheism,  84  Worship  of  Au- 
gustus in  Gaul,  84.  Discontent  of  the 
Druids,  85.  Operations  for  securing  the 
asses  of  the  Alps,  87.  The  Gauls  in- 
uced  by  Drusus  to  erect  an  altar  to  Au- 
gustus and  Rome  at  Lugdunum.  iv.  175. 
Population  of  Gaul  within  and  beyond 
the  Alps,  340,  341.  Revolt  in  Gaul  in  a.d., 
21,  v.  167.  Crushed  by  Sillius,  169.  State 
of  Gaul  at  the  close  of  the  reign  of  Tibe- 
rius, 264.  The  career  of  honours  opened 


530 


INDEX. 


to  the  Gauls  by  Claudius,  SS4;  vi.  9.  Dis- 
affection spread  among  the  Gaulish  states 
by  Civilis,  887.  Triumphant  anticipations 
of  the  revolted  Gauls,  399.  Fresh  forces 
directed  upon  Gaul  by  Mucianus  and  Do- 
mitian,  403.  Neglect  of  the  Gauls  to  de- 
fend the  entrance  to  their  country,  404. 
Reasoned  with  by  Cerealis,  406.  Extinc- 
tion of  the  national  spirit  among  them, 
413.  Journey  of  Hadrian  into  Gaul,  vii. 
343, 

Gellius,  consul,  defeated  by  Spartacus,  i.  51. 
Deposed  from  his  command,  51. 

Gemma,  the,  estimation  in  which  it  was 
held  in  the  Jewish  schools,  vii.  283. 

G enabum,  massacre  of  the  Romans  by  the 
Gauls  at,  ii.  12.  Taken  by  Caesar  and 
abandoned  to  fire  and  sword,  16. 

Genauni,  the,  defeated  by  Drusus,  iv.  160. 

Geneva,  the  frontier  town  oi  the  Allobroges, 
i.,  241. 

“ Georgies  ” of  Virgil,  iv.  440.  Their  moral 
grandeur,  441. 

Gergovia,  menaced  by  Yercingetorix,  ii.  15. 
C®sar  defeated  at,  23. 

Germanicus,  son  of  Drusus,  adopted  into 
the  Julian  family,  iv.  221,  His  games  in 
honour  of  his  father,  250.  Entrusted  with 
the  command  of  the  new  levies  sent  into 
Pannonia,  251.  His  high  promise  and 
first  successes,  254.  His  complete  subju- 
gation of  the  rebels  in  the  province  be- 
tween the  Adriatic  and  the  Danube,  255. 
Marries  Agrippina,  granddaughter  of  Au- 
gustus, 256,  279.  Honours  granted  to  him 
by  Augustus,  265.  In  the  camp  of  his 
uncle  Tiberius,  in  Germany,  277.  Be- 
comes consul,  278.  Birth  of  his  son  Caius, 
279.  Recommended  by  Augustus  to  the 
protection  of  the  senate,  279.  His  popu- 
larity, 2S2.  Suppresses  a mutiny  of  the 
legions  on  the  Rhine,  v.  21,  22.  Sketch  of 
his  character,  23.  Jealousy  of  Tiberius  of 
the  popularity  of  Germanicus,  26.  Ger- 
manicus leads  the  legions  across  the 
Rhine.  30.  His  operations  in  a.d.  15,  31. 
The  title  of  Imperator  conferred  on  him, 
32.  Revisits  the  scene  of  the  slaughter  of 
Varus,  32.  Attacks  Arminius  in  an  un- 
decided engagement,  34.  His  misfortune 
on  his  return  by  sea,  35.  Murmurs  of  the 
emperor  at  the  slender  results  of  the  Ger- 
man campaigns,  36.  Third  campaign  of 
Germanicus  in  a.d.  16,  37.  Confronts  the 
German  forces  on  the  Weser,  38.  Gains  a 
great  victory  over  them,  40.  Returns 
again  unprosperous,  43.  Recovers  the 
Varian  eagles,  44.  Recalled  by  the  em- 
eror  to  Rome,  47.  His  triumph,  48. 
ent  on  a mission  to  the  East,  50.  His 
travels  in  the  East,  57.  Insolence  oi  the 
new  proconsul  of  Syria,  Cn.  Calpurnius 
Pi  so,  to  him,  63.  Germanicus  crowns 
Ztnokin^of  Armenia.  63.  Visits  Egypt,. 
64.  Displeasure  of  his  uncle  Tiberius,  65. 
Returns  to  Syria,  66.  His  regulations 
and  appointments  overruled  in  his  ab- 
sence by  Piso,  66.  His  illness,  66.  Charges 
Piso  and  his  wife  Plancina  with  having 
poisoned  him.  67.  His  death,  67.  Re- 
flexions on  his  character,  6S.  Fondly 
compared  to  Alexander  the  Great,  69. 


Suspicions  of  his  having  been  poisoned, 
69.  Indecent  exultation  of  Piso  at  hia 
death,  70.  Sympathy  of  the  Romans  for 
him,  72,  Demonstrations  of  grief  on  his 
death,  73.  Arrival  of  his  remains  in  Rome, 
73.  Funeral  honours  paid  them  by  the 
people,  74.  Reserved  demeanour  of  Tibe- 
rius and  Livia  on  the  occasion,  74  Fate 
of  his  family,  214. 

Germany,  invaded  by  Drusus,  iv.  178.  Fail- 
ure of  his  first  campaign,  ISO.  His  sec- 
ond expedition,  181.  Campaigns  of  Tibe- 
rius, 189,  237-240.  Expeditions  of  Domi- 
tius,  and  of  Vinicius,  237.  Hesitation  of 
Augustus  in  the  prosecution  of  the  con- 
quest of  Germany,  241.  Final  subjugation 
of  Germany  to  the  Roman  yoke,  266. 
Fancied  security  of  the  Roman  adminis- 
tration in  Germany,  267.  Varus  appointed 
to  the  command  of  the  legions  in  Ger- 
many, 269.  Bloodless  campaign  of  Tibe- 
rius in  a.d.  11,  277.  Political  characteris- 
tics of  the  people  of  Germany,  295.  The 
Rhine  crossed  by  Germanicus,  v.  30.  His 
operations  in  a.d.  15,  31.  And  in  a.d.  16, 
37.  The  Germans,  under  Arminius,  de- 
feated in  a great  battle,  40.  Their  resist- 
ance gradually  crumbles  away,  264.  Meet- 
ing of  the  legions  in  Upper  Germany,  vi. 
298.  Revolt  of  the  Germans  under  Civilis, 
8S5,  et  seq  Attitude  of  the  German  tribes 
towards  Rome  at  the  commencement  of 
the  reign  of  Domitian,  vii.  80.  Journey 
of  Hadrian  into  Germany,  343.  See  also 
Teutones. 

Get®,  their  capacity  for  civilization  : of  cog- 
nate origin  with  the  Dacians,  vii.  182. 

Glabrio,  Acilius,  lately  consuL,  accused  of 
fighting  with  wild  beasts,  vii.  125,  174. 
Exiled,  126. 

Gladiators  of  Batiatus,  i.  50.  Their  revolt 
under  Spartacus,  50.  Their  defeat,  and 
death  of  their  leader,  52.  Cesar’s  band  at 
Capua  broken  up  by  the  senate,  ii.  101. 
Caesar's  exhibition  of  gladiatorial  shows, 
312.  Bloodiness  of  Caius’s  gladiatorial 
shows,  v.  300.  Those  of  Claudius,  394. 
Outbreak  of  gladiators  at  Pr®neste,vi.l43. 

Gold,  uses  of,  amongst  the  Greeks  and  Ro- 
mans, iv.  317. 

Golden  house  of  Nero,  iv.  135.  The  greater 
part  demolished  by  Vespasian,  vii.  23, 
33,  267. 

Gomphi,  city  of,  sacked  by  Caesar,  ii.  224. 

Government,  the  imperial,  formed  by  the 
combination  of  several  distinct  republican 
prerogatives,  iii.  343.  Their  character  and 
functions,  344,  et  seq.  Alliance  of  philos- 
ophy with  government  at  Rome,  vi.  188. 

Governments  of  the  ancients: — 1.  Parthia 
and  the  East:  the  spirit  of  monarchic 
rule,  iv.  295.  2.  Germany  and  the  North: 
the  spirit  of  personal  liberty,  295.  . 8. 
Greece  and  Rome  in  the  West : the  spiilt 
of  municipal  government,  296. 

Gracchi,  agrarian  laws  of  the,  i.  26. 

Gracchus,  Sempronius,  paramour  of  the 
elder  Julia,  slain  by  order  of  Tiberius, 
v.  29. 

Graecinus  Laco,  captain  of  the  urban  police 
assists  Macro  in  the  arrest  of  Sejanus,  v 
224-226. 


INDEX. 


531 


Grampians,  battle  of  the,  between  Agricola 
and  Galgacus,  vii.  75. 

Granius  Marcellus,  prjetor  of  Bithynia,  ac- 
cused of  reflections  on  Tiberius,  acquitted 
but  condemned  for  extortion,  v.  126. 

Greece;  degraded  state  of  intellect  and  mor- 
als in  Greece  in  the  sixth  "'vntury  a.u.  iL 
899.  Decay  and  fall  of  the  Greek  religion, 
400.  Fatal  influence  of  the  philosophy 
of  the  Greeks  upon  the  principles  of  faith 
and  morals  of  the  Komans,  401.  Bene- 
ficial effects  of  Greek  philosophy  confined 
to  a small  class,  416.  Influence  of  Greeks 
on  Roman  literature,  417.  Progress  of 
the  Hellenic  element  among  the  popula- 
tion of  Palestine,  iii.  292.  Greek  coloni- 
zation in  Palestine,  293.  General  dif- 
fusion of  the  Greek  language  in  Western 
Asia,  294.  Influence  of  Greek  civilization 
upon  Jewish  ideas,  295.  Political  charac- 
teristics of  Greece,  iv.  296.  Uses  of  gold 
and  silver  in  Greece,  317.  State  of  the 
cities  of  Greece  under  Augustus,  350, 
et  seq.  The  freedom  of  Greece  proclaimed 
by  Nero,  vi.  270.  His  project  for  cutting 
through  the  Isthmus  of  Corinth,  27i. 
Plunders  Greece  of  her  monuments  of  art, 
276.  Again  reduced  to  a province  by  Ves- 
pasian, vii.  22. 

Greek  language,  its  prevalence  in  the  east- 
ern provinces  of  the  empire,  and  its  gen- 
eral use  at  Rome,  iv.  299,  300. 

Gregory,  Pope,  legend  of^  in  connection 
with  Trajan,  vii.  203. 

Guilds  of  trades,  or  colleges,  in  Rome,  re- 
stored by  Clodius,  i.  178.  Trajan’s  jeal- 
ousy of  guilds  or  trade  combinations,  vii. 
213. 

HADRIANUS  AFER,  father  of  the  em- 
peror Hadrian,  vii.  323. 

Hadrianus,  Publius  JElius,  his  birth  and 
parentage,  vii.  321.  Synoptical  view  of 
his  connection  with  Trajan,  323  note  >. 
His  education  and  accomplishments,  323. 
Rises,  under  Trajan's  patronage,  to  the 
consulship,  225.  Mamed  to  Sabina,  daugh- 
ter of  Matidia,  326.  Popularly  designated 
heir  to  the  empire,  327.  Rumours  about 
the  succession  at  the  death  of  Trajan,  328. 
Hadrian  said  to  have  been  adopted  by 
Trajan  on  his  death-bed,  329.  Confirma- 
tion of  his  succession  by  the  senate  and 
the  army,  330.  Relinquishes  Trajan’s 
conquests  beyond  the  Euphrates,  331. 
Repairs  to  Rome,  and  celebrates  Trajan’s 
triumph,  332.  His  endowments  for  the 
alimentation  of  poor  children,  333.  Un- 
certainty of  the  dates  of  his  reign,  334. 
Dangers  from  the  frontiers  of  Mauretania, 
Dacia,  and  Britain,  334.  Hadrian’s  cam- 
paign in  Miesia,  335.  Suppression  of  a 
conspiracy  formed  against  him  during  his 
absence,  336.  His  alleged  intention  of 
abandoning  Dacia,  336.  Courts  the  sen- 
ate, 337.  His  popular  manners,  339.  His 
occasional  jealousy  and  envy,  339.  Un- 
dertakes to  make  himself  personally  ac- 
quainted with  all  the  provinces,  341.  His 
assiduity  in  performing  the  duties  of  a 
military  chief,  and  in  maintaining  disci- 
pline, 342.  His  progress  into  Gaul  and 


Germany,  343.  And  into  Britain,  843-349. 
Terms  on  which  he  lived  with  Sabina, 
350.  Visits  Spain,  and  erects  a basilica 
at  Nemausus,  in  honor  of  Plotina,  350. 
Visits  and  tranquillizes  Mauretania,  351. 
And  Parthia,352.  His  sojourn  at  Athens, 

352.  Returns  to  Rome,  and  visits  Sicily 
and  Carthage,  352.  His  second  progress, 

353.  His  residence  at  Alexandria  and 
Athens,  353.  His  works  for  the  embel- 
lishment of  Athens,  354  Requited  bj 
the  Athenians  with  the  title  of  Olympius. 
857.  Initiated  into  the  mysteries  at  Eleu- 
sis,  369.  Tolerates  the  Christian  faith, 
369.  Dissatisfied  with  the  conservative 
spirit  of  Athens,  370.  Crosses  over  to 
Alexandria,  370.  His  account  of  the  Alex- 
andrians, 372.  Interest  taken  by  him  in 
the  dogmatic  teaching  of  the  Jews  and 
Christians,  373.  Deatli  of  his  favourite, 
Antinous,  375.  His  visit  to  Thebes,  377. 
And  to  Antioch,  which  disgusts  him  with 
its  frivolity  and  voluptuousness,  378. 
Continues  his  progress  through  Asia 
Minor,  379.  Once  more  revisits  Athens, 
and  takes  up  his  residence  at  Rome,  381. 
Establishes  the  Athenaium  at  Rome,  381. 
His  buildings  in  the  city,  882.  Adopts 
for  a successor  L.  Geionius  Commodus 
Verus,  383.  Premature  death  of  Verus, 
387.  Hadrian  chooses  for  his  successor 
T.  Aurelius  Antoninus,  and  requires  him 
to  adopt  M.  Annius  Verus  and  L.  Verus, 
387.  His  increasing  infirmities  and  irrita- 
tion, 3S9.  His  death,  389.  Estimate  of 
his  character,  390.  His  reign  the  best  of 
the  imperial  series,  392.  His  figure  and 
countenance,  393. 

Hannibal,  his  Gaulish  auxiliaries,  i.  192. 

Helena,  queen  of  Adiabene,  converted  to 
J udaism,  vi.  421. 

Heliopolis,  closing  of  the  Jewish  temple  at, 
vii.  285. 

Helius,  a freed  man  of  Nero,  governs  Rome 
during  Nero’s  absence  in  Greece,  vi.  276. 

Helvetii,  their  preparations  for  a national 
emigration,  i.  161,  192,  240.  Their  terri- 
tory, 214.  Their  numbers  in  the  time  of 
Casar,  230.  Their  restlessness,  238.  Em- 
brace in  their  league  the  Rauraci,  the 
Tullingi,  and  the  Latobrigi,  240.  Their 
choice  between  two  routes  into  Gaul,  240. 
Their  chosen  route,  241.  Prevented  by 
Cresar  from  crossing  the  Rhone  at  Geneva, 
244.  Adopt  the  other  route  on  the  right 
bank  of  the  Rhone,  245.  The  Tigurni  de- 
feated by  Caesar,  247.  Overtures  of  the 
Helvetians  to  Csesar,  248.  March  through 
the  country  of  the  .zEdui,  249.  Engaged 
by  Ciesar  in  a decisive  battle,  and  entirely 
defeated,  251.  Compelled  to  return  to 
their  own  country,  253. 

Helvidius  Priscus,  his  bravery,  vi.  166. 
Charged  with  dereliction  of  his  senatorial 
duties,  171.  His  punishment,  172.  Pro- 
poses the  restoration  of  the  Capitol.  374. 
His  intemperate  opposition  to  Vespasian, 
his  exile  and  death,  vii.  31. 

Heniochi.  the,  compelled  to  submit  to  Tra- 
jan, vii.  303. 

Herculannm.  swallowed  up  by  streams  of 
lava,  viL  53,  56. 


532 


INDEX. 


Hermunduri,  a tribe  of  interior  Germany, 
transplanted  into  the  vacant  seats  of  the 
Marcomanni,  iv.  237.  Attack  the  Quadi 
and  Marcomanni,  and  contest  with  the 
Chatti  the  salt  mines  on  the  Seale,  vii.  85. 

Herod  the  Great,  son  of  Antipa.er  the  Idu- 
mean,  obtains  the  kingdom  of  Ju^ea,  iii. 
190.  Governs  Galilee,  under  the  piotec- 
tion  of  Sextus  Caesar,  301,  303.  The  na- 
tional spirit  roused  against  him,  302.  Re- 
mark or  Sameas,  or  Shammai,  respecting 
him.  802.  Confirmed  by  Cassius  in  the 
government  of  Ccele-Syria,  803.  Pays 
court  to  Antonins,  and  marries  Mariamne, 
808,  304.  Receives  the  kingdom  of  Judea, 
805.  Cuts  off  the  Asmonean  princes,  305. 
Rejects  the  advances  of  Cleopatra,  307. 
Confirmed  in  his  kingdom  by  Octavius, 
282,  307.  His  love  and  jealousy  of  Ma- 
riamne, 308.  Causes  her  to  be  murdered, 
808.  His  remorse  at  her  death,  808.  His 
public  works  in  Jerusalem  and  obse- 
quiousness to  Rome,  309.  Favoured  by 
Agrippa,  iv.  113.  Additions  made  to  his 
territory  by  Augustus,  114.  Guaranteed 
from  interference  of  the  governor  of  Syria, 
114.  Visits  Agrippa  in  Syria,  162.  His 
sons  Aristobulus  and  Alexander,  162. 
Leads  Agrippa  through  Judea,  163.  His 
death,  215.  His  will  confirmed  by  Caius 
Ca.*sar,  216.  Division  of  his  kingdom 
among  his  sons,  v.  269.  His  family  at 
Rome,  274. 

Herod  Antipas,  son  of  Herod  the  Great, 
tetrarch  of  Gal  ilea  with  Peraea,  v.  269. 
Marries  Herodias,  and  has  the  sovereignty 
of  Samaria  given  to  him,  277,  278.  Ban- 
ished, 312. 

Herod  Agrippa,  a }rounger  son  of  Herod  the 
Great,  supports  Vespasian,  vi.  350. 

Herod  Agrippa,  son  of  Aristobulus,  educated 
at  Rome,  v.  276.  Attaches  himself  to 
Caius  Caesar,  whom  he  inspires  with  love 
for  Eastern  customs  and  despotism,  277- 
280.  Arrested  by  Tiberius,  but  released 
on  the  accession  of  Caius,  2S3.  The  sov- 
ereignty of  a part  of  Palestine  given  to 
him  by  the  emperor  Caius,  302.  Quits 
Rome  for  Galilee,  308.  Causes  disturb- 
ances at  Alexandria,  309.  Has  Samaria 
added  to  his  dominions,  812.  Pleads  for 
the  Jews  with  Caius,  319.  Buries  Caius, 
865.  Aids  Claudius  in  obtaining  the  em- 
pire, 367.  Judea  added  to  his  kingdom, 
380.  His  popularity  with  the  Jews,  3S0. 
His  death  at  Caesarea,  381.  His  four  chil- 
dren, 417. 

Herod  Agrippa,  son  of  the  preceding,  kept 
in  honourable  custody  at  Rome,  v.  381 ; 
vi.  419.  Has  tnc  sovereignty  of  part  of 
Palestine  given  him  by  Claudius,  423. 
Employed  as  a spy  upon  the  Jews  in  Je- 
rusalem, 424. 

Herodes,  king  of  Chalcis,  vi.  419. 

Herodes  Atticus,  his  wealth,  eloquence,  and 
munificence  at  Athens,  vii.  363.  Alleged 
cause  of  his  death,  363. 

Herodias,  daughter  of  Aristobulus,  forsakes 
her  husband  Philippus,  and  marries  Herod 
Antipas,  v.  277,  278.  Shares  Herod’s  exile 
voluntarily,  312. 

* Heroils”  of  Ovid,  remarks  on  the,  iv  462. 


Herophilus,  or  Amatius,  asserts  his  descent 
from  Marius,  iii.  48.  Banished  from  Rom* 
by  Caesar,  48.  Put  to  death  by  M.  Anto- 
ni us,  49. 

Hesns,  the  Gallic  Mars,  i.  223;  iv.  84. 

Hirrus,  Lucceius,  an  unsuccessful  candidate 
for  a place  in  the  college  of  augurs,  ii.  53. 
Sent  by  Pompeiuson  amission  toParthia, 
1S9.  His  fears  of  being  thrust  aside,  226. 
Thrown  into  chains  by  the  king  of  Parthia, 
242. 

Hirtius,  A.,  a friend  of  Ciesar,  author  of  tho 
seventh  book  of  the  commentaries  on  the 
Gallic  war,  ii.  352.  Designated  consul  for 
.A.TJ.  711,  365;  iii.  82,  105.  Marches  to  the 
Cisalpine,  105.  Attacks  Antonius,  108. 
Slain  in  an  engagement  before  Mutina,  i 19. 

“Historia  Augusta,”  the  series  of  the  impe- 
perial  biographies  known  by  the  name  of 
the,  vii.  321  note  ■. 

Historians  of  the  Flavian  age,  examination 
of  their  works,  vii.  233.  The  writings  of 
Tacitus  more  biographical  than  historical, 
241.  Historical  importance  of  the  prince’s 
personal  character,  242.  Hence  the  biog- 
raphies of  Suetonius  supply  the  place  of 
history,  242.  Popularity  of  historical 
writing  under  Trajan,  243.  "Want  of  a 
critical  spirit  in  historical  writing  com- 
bined with  acute  criticism  on  grammar, 
245.  Preference  of  the  Romans  for  biog- 
raphy to  history,  246. 

Horace,  Q.,  Flaccus,  entrusted  by  Brutus 
with  a command  in  Macedonia,  iii.  158. 
Renounces  the  profession  of  arms,  172. 
Confiscation  of  his  patrimony,  177.  Re- 
stored to  his  estates  through  Maecenas,  216. 
His  description  of  the  battle  of  Actium, 
254.  His  hymn  for  the  Ludi  Seculares, 
375.  His  political  mission,  iv.  442. 
Sketch  of  his  career,  452.  Nature  of  his 
connection  with  Augustus  and  Maecenas, 
452.  His  pretensions  to  religious  senti- 
ment, 455.  Employed  to  recommend 
moderation  and  contentment  to  the  rest- 
less nobles,  456.  llis  dissatisfaction  in  his 
later  years,  455.  Compared  with  Martial, 
vii.  232. 

Hordeonius  Flaccus,  appointed  consular  le- 
gatus  of  the  legions  in  Upper  Germany, 
vi.  318.  Deceived  by  Civilis,  389.  Sends 
Mummius  Lupercus  against  Civilis,  389. 
Who  defeats  the  Romans,  390.  Yields  to 
the  demands  of  the  Batavian  cohorts;  his 
irresolution,  891.  Compelled  by  his  sol- 
diers to  yield  the  command  of  his  array 
to  Vocula,  393.  Thrown  into  chains  by 
his  soldiers,  and  released  by  Vocula,  393. 
Requires  his  soldiers  to  take  the  oath  to 
Vespasian,  395.  Murdered  by  them,  398. 

Hortalus,  grandson  of  Hortensius  the  orator, 
petitions  the  senate  as  a pauper,  and  is  re- 
fused relief  by  Tiberius,  v.  113, 114. 

Ilortensia,  daughter  of  Hortensius,  her 
speech  before  the  triumvirs,  iii.  155  note 3. 

Hortensius,  Q.,  his  voluptuous  refinements, 

i.  83-85.  His  character,  317.  His  death, 

ii.  76  note'1.  His  widow  Marcia  married 
to  Cato,  194. 

nouses  of  the  Romans,  described,  iv.  800- 
393.  Magnificence  of  the  dwellings  of  th# 
nobility,  vii.  267. 


INDEX. 


533 


n vrcanus,  John  re  placed  in  the  high  priest- 
hood by  Poinpeius,  i.  139.  Supported 
against  the  family  of  Aristobulus  by  the 
proconsul  Gabinius,  350.  Connects  him- 
self with  the  Saddncees,  or  anti-national 
party,  iii.  293.  Supported  by  Pompeius, 
299.  Summons  Herod  before  the  Sanhe- 
drim, 302.  Murdered  by  Herod,  307. 

IBERI,  submission  of  the,  to  Trajan,  vii. 
303. 

Iberia,  See  Spain.  Origin  of  the  name, 
i.  454  note. 

Iceni,  a British  tribe,  their  dwelling-place, 
vi.  18.  Their  jealousy  of  the  Trinobantes, 
19.  Their  cowardly  submission  to  Plau- 
tius,  23.  Defeated  by  Ostorius  Scapula, 
29.  Their  discontent  and  insurrection 
under  Boadicea,  43,  44.  Defeated,  and 
their  revolt  finally  suppressed,  4S,  50. 
Ignatius,  his  martyrdom  at  Antioch,  vii.  293. 
Uncertainty  as  to  its  date,  29L  His 
epistles,  294  note  l. 

Iguvium  taken  by  Caesar,  ii.  100. 

‘Ikiov  a <pov,  the,  of  Ptolemy,  i.  379  note  b 
Ilerda,  a fortress  and  magazine  of  the  Pom- 
peians in  Spain,  ii.  154.  Defended  by 
Afranius  against  Caesar,  138. 

Ilium,  Agrippa’s  harsh  treatment  of  the 
people  of,  iv.  104.  Nero  pleads  for  it,  v. 
452. 

Illyricum,  Roman  province  of,  its  extent, 
i.  33.  Visit  of  Caesar  to,  3S4.  State  of.  in 
the  time  of  C:esar,  iv.  120.  Its  dimensions 
enlarged  by  Augustus,  120.  Revolt  of  the 
Illyrians,  and  its  causes,  246. 

Im peri um,  the,  its  original  import,  iii.  344. 
The  consul  imperator  only  in  the  field, 
845.  The  ensigns  of  command  laid  aside 
on  entering  the  city,  except  in  case  of  a 
triumph,  345,  <346.  The  proconsular  im- 
perinin,  its  privileges  and  growth,  346, 347. 
“ Imperator,11  as  a praenomen.  assumed  by 
Cassar,  348.  The  proconsular  imperium 
of  the  second  triumvirate,  349.  Process 
by  which  the  sovereign  rights  of  the  Ro- 
man people  were  gradually  taken  from 
them  and  transferred  through  the  senate 
to  the  emperor  himself,  v."  98-117.  Su- 
premacy of  the  emperor  in  election,  legis- 
lation, and  jurisdiction,  112.  Control  of 
the  emperor  over  the  senate  through  the 
powers  of  the  censorship,  113.  And 
through  the  law  of  majestas,  114.  His 
authority  in  matters  of  national  usage, 
441.  Characteristics  of  the  imperial  tyr- 
anny, vi.  174.  Its  acts  generally  shrouded 
in  comparative  privacy,  175.  * Historical 
importance  of  the  prince’s  personal  char- 
acter, vii.  242. 

India,  envoys  from,  sent  to  Augustus  in 
Spain,  iv.  66.  And  from  the  kings  Pan- 
di  r.  and  Porus,  118. 

Indus,  Tulius,  a Gaul,  sides  with  the  Ro- 
man- v.  168. 

Indutiomarus,  chieftain  of  the  Treviri,  sub- 
mits to  Caesar,  i.  385.  Retreats  from  be- 
fore the  camp  of  Labienus,  396.  His  death, 
398. 

Infanticide,  and  exposure  of  children,  prac- 
tice of,  among  the  Romans,  iv.  400 ; v.  166 
note*. 


Inguiomerus,  a German,  his  defection,  v.  32. 
Engaged  with  Arminius  against  the  Ro- 
mans, 41. 

Insubres,  the,  subjugated  by  the  Romans,  i 
191. 

Interreges,  duties  of  the,  i.  430. 

Inundations  at  Rome,  iv.  4^8. 

Isca  Damniorum  (Exeter)  vi.  27  note  b 

Isca  Silurum,  vi.  40  note  b 

Isis,  worship  of,  at  Rome  confounded  with 
Judaism,  and  prohibited  by  Tiberius, 
150;  vi.  202.  Temple  of,  at  Rome,  re- 
stored by  Domitian,  vii.  118.  Worship  of 
naturalized  at  Rome,  121. 

Italicus,  nephew  of  Arminius,  given  as  k:  ng 
to  the  Cherusci,  v.  13.  His  dissensions 
with  his  people,  14. 

Italy,  aristocratic  nature  of  the  senates  of 
the  towns  of,  i.  26.  Their  claims  to  the 
Latin  franchise  and  resistance  of  the  Ro- 
mans, 27.  The  Social  War,  27.  Triumph 
of  the  Romans,  but  eventual  concession  of 
the  Italian  claims,  28.  Oligarchical  reac- 
tion under  Sulla,  and  ascendancy  of  the 
exclusive  or  Roman  policy,  31,  32.  Ac- 
quiescence of  the  Italians  in  Sulla’s  settle- 
ment, 32.  The  boundaries  of  Italy,  32. 
The  Italians  conciliated  by  their  compre- 
hension in  the  Roman  state,  49.  They 
lend  no  countenance  to  the  movements  of 
Lepidus  and  Brutus,  49.  Alarm  of  the 
Romans  at  the  diminution  of  the  free 
population  of  Italy,  56.  Immigrations  of 
the  Gauls  into  Italy,  188,  190.  Horrors 
of  the  triumviral  proscriptions  through- 
out Italy,  iii.  156.  Lands  confiscated  by 
Octavius  to  satisfy  the  legionaries,  177. 
Tranquillity  finally  restored,  184.  The 
boundary  of  Italy  at  Ad  Fines,  iv.  88. 
State  of  the  peninsula  at  the  beginning  of 
the  reign  of  Augustus,  121.  Who  pro- 
nounces the  Var  the  boundary  of  Italy 
and  Gaul,  122.  The  eleven  regions  or 
circles,  122.  Statement  of  Polybius  re- 
garding the  population  of  Italy,  333.  In- 
ferences from  climate  and  physical  feat- 
ures, 335.  Basis  for  an  approximate  cal- 
culation of  the  population,  336.  The  popu- 
lation of  Italy  compared  with  that  of  the 
provinces,  340.  Greek  cities  in  Italy, 
362.  The  police  of  Italy,  v.  143.  The 
governmont  of  Italy  under  Tiberius,  148. 
Expulsion  of  the  soothsayers,  149.  The 
cities  of  Italy  plundered  by  the  Vitel- 
lians,  vi.  339.  Decrease  in  the  population 
of  Italy  in  the  reign  of  Vespasian,  vii.  26. 
And  decline  of  wealth  in  the  reign  of  Do- 
mitian, 114.  Trajan’s  measures  for  the 
special  benefit  of  Italy,  211. 

Itinerary  system  of  the  Romans  in  Gaul,  iv. 
80.  That  of  Antoninus,  vii.  402.  And  of 
Jerusalem,  402. 

Itius,  Portus,  Ciesar’s  force  for  the  subjuga- 
tion of  Britain  assembled  at,  i.  3S5. 

JAMES,  first  bishop  of  Jerusalem,  his 
martyrdom,  vii.  294  note. 

Janiculum,  the  white  signal  flag  on  the,  i. 
10S.  Struck  by  Metellus.  10S.  The  Jani- 
culan  quarter  described,  iv.  384. 

Janus,  temple  of,  iii.  320.  Shut  by  Octaviu^ 
821.  And  by  Vespasian,  vii.  10. 


534 


INDEX. 


Japydes,  the,  defeated  by  Octavius,  iii.  283. 

Javolenus,  celebrated  jurisconsult,  vii.  405. 

Jerusalem,  the  temple-citadel  of,  takei  by 
Pompeius,  i.  139.  John  Hyrcanus  re- 
placed in  the  high-  priesthood,  139.  The 
Holy  of  Holies  profaned  by  Pompeius, 
139.  Spoliation  of  the  Temple  by  Cras- 
sus,  139  note  ^ Alb  note'.  Splendour  of 
the  city  in  the  reign  of  Tiberius,  v.  279. 
And  magnificence  of  its  sovereigns,  230. 
The  emperor  Caius’s  statue  ordered  to  be 
set  up  in  the  Holy  ol  Holies,  316.  Solemn 
entry  of  Herod  Agrippa  into  Jerusalem, 
330.  The  two  contending  factions,  3S0, 
831.  Tumults  in  Jerusalem  under  the 
first  Koman  procurators  controlled  by  the 
prudence  of  the  Sanhedrim,  vi.  421.  Herod 
Agrippa,  the  tetrarch,  employed  as  a spy 
upon  the  Jews,  421  The  Zealots,  or 
party  of  independence,  425,  428.  Their 
Sicarii,  or  secret  assassins,  425.  A Ro- 
man detachment  in  the  city  compelled  to 
capitulate,  and  massacred,  426.  Defeat 
of  Cestius  Gallus  before  the  city,  427. 
Origin  of  the  Jews  and  Jerusalem,  accord- 
ing to  Tacitus,  441.  Religious  sentiment 
among  the  Jews  at  this  period,  445.  Rev- 
olutionary proceedings  of  the  Zealots  in 
Jerusalem,  447.  They  massacre  the  mod- 
erate party  and  assume  the  government, 
443.  In  three  factions,  occupy  the  city, 
449.  Topography  of  Jerusalem,  450.  Titus 
conducts  an  army  against  the  city,  454. 
Operations  of  the  siege,  455,  et  fteq. 
Forcing  of  the  outer  wall,  456.  The  popu- 
lation overawed  by  the  resolution  of  the 
Zealots  to  defend  the  city  to  the  last,  456. 
Lines  of  circumvallation  drawn  by  Titus 
round  the  city,  457.  Distress  of  the  citi- 
zens, 458,  467.  Famine  and  portents,  458. 
The  Christians  retire  from  the  city,  460. 
The  fortress  Antonia  taken,  460.  Destruc- 
tion of  the  Temple,  463,  464.  The  Upper 
City  defended  by  the  Zealots,  466.  Dis- 
solution of  order  and  discipline  among 
the  besieged,  467.  Destruction  of  the 
Upper  City,  468.  Conclusion  of  the  war, 
471.  The  Jewish  trophies  on  the  arch  of 
Titus,  472.  Foundation  of  the  colony  of 
^Elia  Capitolina  and  desecration  of  the 
holy  places,  vii.  308,  309. 

.Tews,  those  of  Rome  favoured  by  Ctesar,  ii. 
333;  iii.  2S4;  vi.  204.  Their  sorrow  and 
resentment  at  his  murder,  iii.  41,  284. 
'The  Jews  of  Alexandria,  231,  284.  Their 
character  in  foreign  lands,  iii.  283.  Their 
dispersion  and  settlement  in  the  Roman 
empire,  in  Greece,  in  Babylon  and  JSthi- 
opia,  283-285.  Their  synagogue  in  Rome, 
234.  Form  a third  part  of  the  population 
of  Alexandria,  286.  Their  proselytizing 
activity,  2S6.  Form  a national  con- 
federacy throughout  the  three  continents, 
287.  The  narrowness  of  their  limits  the 
main  cause  of  their  dispersion,  28S.  Greek 
and  Jewish  emigration  compared,  288. 
Attempts  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  to 
Hellinize  them,  290.  Recovery  of  their 
independence  under  the  Maccabees,  292. 
Their  first  treaty  with  Rome,  292.  Influ- 
ence of  Greek  civilization  on  Jewish 
ideas,  292,  295.  First  antagonism  of  the 


Pharisees  and  Sadducees,  295,  296.  In 
terference  of  the  Romans  in  Jewish  af 
fairs,  299.  Pompeius  decides  between 
the  claims  of  Hyrcanus  and  Aristobulos, 
299.  Resistance  of  Jews  to  the  Romans, 
and  commencement  of  the  struggle  be- 
tween them,  300.  Scaurus,  Gabinius, 
Oassus,  and  Ca.*sar,  in  Palestine,  300. 
Ascendancy  of  the  Herods,  the  family  of 
Antipater  the  Idumean,  301.  The  national 
spirit  roused  against  them,  302.  Herod 
the  Great  receives  the  kingdom  of  Judea 
from  Antonins,  305.  Favours  granted  by 
Agrippa  to  the  Jews,  iv.  164.  The  Jews 
in  Rome  patronized  by  the  first  Csesars, 
vi.  204.  Their  turbulence  at  Rome,  206, 
Proscribed  and  banished  by  Tiberius,  v. 
150;  vi.  207.  Confounded  with  the  wor- 
shippers of  Isis,  v,  150;  vi.  207.  At  feud 
with  the  Egyptians,  v.  310.  Divided 
abroad  and  at  home  with  factions,  vi.  208. 
Spiritual  pride  of  the  Jewish  freedmen  in 
Rome,  209.  Their  reception  of  Christian 
ity,  210.  Special  applicability  of  St.  Paul's 
teaching  to  the  Roman  Jews  and  prose- 
lytes, 2l0.  The  claim  of  Caius  to  divine 
worship  resented  with  indignation  by  the 
Jews,  v.  315.  Mission  of  Philo  the  Jew 
to  the  emperor.  316.  The  emperor’s 
statue  ordered  to  be  set  up  in  the  temple 
of  Jerusalem,  316.  Caius’s  interview  with 
the  Alexandrian  and  Jewish  envoys  in  the 
gardens  of  Maecenas,  317.  Tone  of  inter- 
course among  the  Jews,  vi.  417.  The 
great  rising  of  the  Jews  against  the  Ro- 
mans, 418,  et  seq.  Attitude  of  the  Jews 
in  the  West  and  in  the  East,  418.  Sources 
of  the  history  of  the  Jews  misappreciated 
by  Tacitus,  439.  His  strange  misrepre- 
sentation of  them  and  of  their  religion,  441. 
Vigour  of  religious  sentiment  among  the 
Jews  at  the  time  of  Josephus,  445.  The 
Jews,  in  the  view  of  Christians,  judi- 
cially abandoned  to  their  selfish  passions, 
446.  Their  importance  at  Rome,  vii.  122, 
123.  Their  dispersion  in  the  East,  284. 
Their  numbers  in  Mesopotamia,  and  their 
turbulence  in  Egypt,  Cyprus,  and  Cyrene, 
284.  Severe  measures  taken  against  them 
in  Egypt,  284.  Closing  of  the  temple  at 
Heliopolis,  285.  Sedition  of  Jonathan  at 
Cyrene,  286  Contempt  into  which  the 
Jews  at  Rome  had  fallen  at  this  time,  286. 
General  revolt  of  the  Jews  throughout 
the  East  in  the  reign  of  Trajan,  303, 

• Atrocities  perpetrated  by  the  insurgents, 
309,  310.  Insurrection  of  the  Jews  in 
Palestine,  314.  Preservation  of  the  Jew- 
ish nationality  by  the  teaching  of  the  Jew 
ish  doctors  at  Tiberias,  314.  Typical 
character  of  the  Rabbi  Akiba,  315.  Bar- 
cochebas  appointed  Jewish  leader  in  Pal- 
estine, 316.  Final  defeat  and  dispersion 
of  the  Jews  under  Barcochebas,  318.  Fi- 
nal separation  of  the  Christians  from  tha 
Jews,  319. 

John  of  Giscala,  a chief  of  the  Zealots  in 
Jerusalem,  vi.  429.  His  character  a£  drawn 
by  Josephus,  433.  His  command  in  the 
city  during  the  great  siege,  449.  Take? 
refuge  under  ground,  467.  His  life  spared, 
470. 


INDEX. 


ooo 


Jonathan  of  Cyrene,  his  sedition,  vii.  286. 
Put  to  death,  2S6  note1. 

Jotapata,  story  of  the  siege  and  capture  of, 
yi.  433. 

Joppa,  taken  and  destroyed  by  the  Eomans, 
vi.  436. 

Josephus,  the  historian,  his  account  of  the 
emperor  Tiberius,  v.  255,  256.  Accoant 
of,  vi.  430.  In  command  in  Galilee,  430. 
Number  of  troops  under  his  command, 
432.  Harassed  by  the  Zealots,  433.  De- 
feats Jotapata,  and  is  captured  by  the  Eo- 
mans, 433.  Favoured  by  Vespasian,  435. 
Adopts  the  name  of  Titus  Flavins,  435. 
Employed  by  Titus  to  offer  terms  to  the 
Jews,  457,  461.  466.  Charged  by  bis  coun- 
trymen with  being  a renegade,  *431. 

Juba,  king  of  Numidia,  insulted  by  Ca?sar  at 
Eome,  i.  145.  His  hostility  to  Caesar,  ii.  164. 
Attacks  and  defeats  Curio,  166, 167.  His 
cruelty  to  his  Eoman  prisoners,  168.  His 
audacious  presumption,  168.  Joined  by 
Scipio  and  Varus,  283.  His  army,  2S6. 
At  Utica  with  Cato,  286.  Urges  the  de- 
struction of  Utica,  287.  Attacked  by 
Bocchus,  289.  Defeats  Caesar,  291.  De- 
fends his  capital,  Cirta,  292.  His  insolence 
in  the  senatorian  camp,  293.  His  death, 
SOI,  302. 

Juba,  the  younger,  spared  by  Caesar,  ii.  310. 
Appointed  king  of  Mauretania  by  Augus- 
tus. and  marries  Cleopatra  Selene,  daugh- 
ter of  Autonius,  iv.  91;  v.  142.  His  ac- 
count of  the  expedition  of  Caius  Caesar  to 
the  East,  iv.  214.  His  son,  Ptolemieus  put 
to  death  by  Caius,  v.  353. 

Judaism,  arrival  of  the  time  for  appreciating 
the  idea  of  the  Divine  Unity,  the  essen- 
tial dogma  of,  vi.  203.  Freedom  of  Juda- 
ism offensive  to  Domitian,  vii.  122.  The 
Jewish  tribute,  123.  Proscription  of  Eo- 
man nobles  on  a charge  of  Judaism,  124. 
Overthrow  of  the  Jewish,  and  succession 
of  the  Christian  dispensation,  291.  Es- 
tablishment of  the  Jewish  schools  at  Ti- 
berias, 292.  The  Law,  the  Mischna,  and 
the  Gemara,  2S3.  Interest  taken  by  Do- 
mitian in  the  dogmatic  teaching  of  Juda- 
ism, 373. 

i udea,  its  relations  to  Eome,  iii.  282.  Ably 
governed  by  Herod  the  Great,  309.  Vis- 
ited by  Agrippa,  iv.  162.  Given  to  his  son 
Archelaus,  v.  269.  Insurrection  in.  269. 
Crushed  by  Varus,  270.  The  kingdom  an- 
nexed to  the  Eoman  emire,  270 ; vi.  263, 
420.  Government  of  the  procurator  Pon- 
tius Pilatus,  v.  270,  271.  Condition  of  Ju- 
dea under  Eoman  dominion,  272.  Given 
to  Herod  Agrippa,  3S0.  Eeverts  to  Eome, 
881.  Titus  charged  with  the  conduct  of 
affairs  in  Judea,  vi.  351.  Judea  in  the  ma- 
turity of  its  powers,  415.  Its  material 
prosperity,  and  antique  simplicity  of  man- 
ners, 417.  Eesistance  of  the  brigands  or 
false  Christs,  420.  Insurrection  in  Gali- 
lee, put  down  by  Quadratus,  prefect  of 
Byria,  422.  Comparative  tranquillity  of 
Judea  during  the  government  of  Felix, 
423.  Tumults  in  Jerusalem,  421,  et  seq. 
Vespasian  appointed  to  conduct  operations 
In  Judea,  428.  The  two  contending  fac- 
tions, Zealots  and  Herodians,  and  their 


leaders,  383,  425,  428,  429.  Vespasian’s 
first  operations  directed  against  Galilee. 
429.  Military  resources  of  Judea,  432. 
Josephus  in  command  in  Galilee,  430. 
Siege  and  capture  of  Jotapata,  433.  Of 
Joppa,  436.  Of  Tiberias  and  Tarichea, 
437.  Eeduction  of  Penea,  437.  Suspen- 
sion of  hostilities  during  the  struggle  for 
the  succession,  438.  Destruction  of  Jeru- 
salem and  conclusion  of  the  war  in  Judea, 
4o4— 470. 

Judex,  enactmeut  of  a pecuniary  qualifica- 
tion for  the  office  of,  i.  346.  The  judices 
under  the  empire,  iii,  401. 

Judgment  Silent,  the  mode  of  procedure  so 
called,  i.  361. 

Judicia,  the,  restored  to  the  senate  by  Sulla, 
i.  32.  Its  shameless  partiality  and  corrup- 
tion, 53.  Pompeius  unites  with  Crassus 
and  Cicero  in  transferring  a share  of  the 
judicia  from  the  nobles  to  the  knights,  71. 
Distribution  of  the  judicia  among  the  sen- 
ate, the  knights,  and  the  aerarian" tribunes, 
100. 

Julia,  aunt  of  Ca?sar,  and  widow  of  Marius, 
her  funeral  oration  pronounced  by  Carsar, 
i.  101. 

Julia,  the  younger  of  Cfesar's  sisters,  mar- 
ried to  Balbus,  ii.  367  note  l.  Her  funeral 
oration  pronounced  by  Augustus,  367 
note '. 

Julia,  daughter  of  Ca?sar.  married  to  Pom- 
peius i.  176.  Cause  of  her  last  illness, 
344.  Her  death,  362.  Her  obsequies  in 
the  field  of  Mars,  364.  Effect  of  her 
death  on  the  alliance  of  Pompeius  and 
Ciesar,  405. 

Julia,  daughter  of  Augustus  and  Scribonia, 
date  of  her  birth,  iv.  126,  note  '.  Married 
(1)  to  Marcellus,  127 ; (2)  to  Agrippa,  135; 
(3)  to  Tiberius,  170,  203.  Her  children  by 
Agrippa,  136.  Accompanies  her  husband 
to  the  East,  162.  Betrothed  to  Tiberius, 
170.  Married  to  him,  173, 1S2.  Affection 
of  Augustus  for  her,  200.  Her  beauty,  ac- 
complishments, and  levities,  200-204.  Iler 
disorderly  life,  disgrace,  and  banishment, 
165,  173,  210-212.  Specially  exempted 
from  all  benefits  in  her  father’s  will,  v.  13. 
Her  death  at  Ehegium,  29. 

Julia,  granddaughter  of  Augustus,  daughter 
of  Agrippa  and  Julia,  married  to  L J£mi- 
lius  raulus,  iv.  256.  Banished  by  her 
grandfather,  257.  Specially  exempted 
from  sharing  his  property,  v.  13.  Her 
death  in  the  Island  of  Trimerus,  210. 

Julia,  daughter  of  Titus,  vii.  64. 

Julia,  daughter  of  Germanicus,  married  to 
Vinicius,  v.  249.  Eecalled  from  banish- 
ment by  Claudius,  but  again  banished,  407. 
Her  death,  407. 

Julia,  daughter  of  Drusus  and  Livilla,  mar- 
ried (1)  to  Nero  Germanicus;  (2)  to  Eu- 
bellus  Blandus,  v.  250. 

Julian  basilica  at  Eome,  inaugurated  by  Oc- 
tavius, iii.  314. 

Julian  haven,  the.  constructed  by  Agrippa, 
iii.  196.  Nero’s  proposed  canal  from  it  to 
Eome,  vi.  141. 

Julianus,  his  successes  over  the  Dacian^ 
vii.  89. 

Julii,  family  of  the.  i.  91  note. 


536 


INDEX. 


Julius,  Julus,  the  name,  ir.  Roman  history, 
i.  91. 

Julius,  the  month,  the  name  of  Quintilis 
changed  to,  iii.  65,  73,  374. 

Julius  Alpinulus,  the  Helvetian  chief,  put  to 
death  by  Caecina,  vi.  323. 

Junia  Claudilla,  married  to  Caius  Caesar,  v. 
236,  252.  Her  death,  252. 

Junia  Silana,  wife  of  0.  Silius.  Her  feud 
with  Agrippina,  vi.  79.  Her  banishment,  81. 

Junia  Tertia,  or  Tertulla,  her  mother,  iii.  72. 
Ribald  story  of  her,  72.  Her  illustrious 
obsequies,  v.  173. 

Junius,  the  name  of  the  month,  changed  to 
Germanicus,  vi.  159. 

Junius  Blaesus.  See  Blsesus. 

Junius  Novatus,  partisan  of  Agrippa  Postu- 
mus,  his  attack  on  Augustus,  v.  122. 

Junius  Priscus,  his  wealth  and  execution,  v. 
342. 

Junius  Rusticus,  prefect  of  Rome,  vii.  459. 
Supposed  to  have  passed  sentence  on  Jus- 
tin, 459. 

Jupiter  Capitolinus  struck  by  lightning,  i 
331).  Temple  of,  iv.  376.  That  of  Jupiter 
Feretrius,  377. 

Jurisconsults,  celebrated,  in  the  reign  of  An- 
toninus Pius,  vii.  403. 

Jus  Gentium  and  Jus  Civile,  anomalous  re- 
lations of  the,  in  the  Flavian  era,  vii.  425. 
Gaius’s  statement  of  the  distinction  be- 
tween them,  425. 

Jus  Honorarium,  character  of  the,  vii.  426. 

Justin  the  Martyr,  his  apologies  for  the 
Christians,  vii.  369  note  -.  His  judge,  Ju- 
nius Rusticus,  459. 

Jus  trium  liberorum,  the,  ii.  330. 

Juvavium,  foundation  of  a colony  by  Ha- 
drian at,  vii.  343. 

Juvenal,  the  “Council  of  the  Turbot ‘’de- 
scribed by,  vii.  140.  His  satires  com- 
pared with  those  of  Persius,  229.  His 
manliness,  273.  Compared  with  Tacitus, 
274.  Difference  in  the  tone  of  his  earlier 
and  later  writings,  276.  Considered  as  a 
champion  of  Roman  ideas,  278. 

Juvenalia,  the  festival  of  the,  instituted  by 
Nero,  vi.  107,  103. 

Juventius  Celsus  conspires  against  Domi- 
tian,  but  pardoned  on  condition  of  turning 
delator,  vii.  147. 

KIDNAPPING,  prevalence  of,  in  Italy, 
ii.  332. 

Knights,  their  moral  superiority  to  the  sen- 
ators, i.  54.  A reform  in  favour  of  the 
equestrian  order  undertaken  by  Pompeius, 
70.  Who  unites  with  Crassus  and  Cicero, 
in  transferring  a share  in  the  judicia  to 
them,  72.  Mortified  and  irritated  by  Cato, 
125.  Occupation  and  distinction  of  the 
knights,  iii.  397.  The  lists  of  the  knights 
re\  ised  by  Claudius,  v.  385.  And  their 
privileges  extended  by  him,  457. 

LABEO,  Q.  ANTISTIUS,  commits  suicide 
at  Philippi,  iii.  170. 

Label i us,  Decimus,  compelled  by  Caesar  to 
appear  on  the  stage,  ii.  358. 

Labienus,  Q.,  son  of  Titus,  enters  the  Par- 
thian service,  his  successes  in  Asia,  arro- 
gance, and  death,  iii  191, 192. 


Labienus,  T.,  the  ablest  of  Caesar’s  officers  in 
Gaul,  i.  246,  264.  Left  in  command  in 
Gaul,  262.  At  the  battle  with  the  Ncrvii, 
277,  279.  Stationed  in  the  country  of  the 
Treviri,  291.  Chastises  the  Morini,  383. 
Attacked  by  and  repulses  the  Gauls,  397. 
Defeats  the  Treviri,  399.  Checks  the 
Menapii,  401.  His  success  in  the  HSduan 
war,  ii.  26,  36.  Puts  down  a revolt  of  the 
Treviri,  36.  His  perfidy  to  Commius,  38. 
Caesar  s legatus  in  the  Cisalpine,  77.  His 
defection  from  Caesar,  99.  Checks  deser- 
tion in  the  Pompeian  army,  198.  His 
cruelty  to  Caesarian  prisoners,  221.  His 
attempt  on  Cyrene,  283.  Defeats  Caesar 
292.  Escapes  from  Thapsus,  305.  Falls 
at  Munda,  317. 

Labienus,  T.,  his  freedom  as  a writer  of  his- 
tory, iv.  436.  Ilis  writings  suppressed  by 
the  senate,  but  restored  to  circulation  by 
Caius,  v.  289. 

Laco, Cornelius,  an  adherent  of  Galba,  vi.  294. 

Lamia,  iElius,  detained  by  Tiberius  from 
his  government  of  Syria,  vi.  262. 

Lamia,  iElius,  deprived  of  his  wife  and  slain 
by  Domitian,  vii.  150. 

Lands  assigned  by  Caesar  to  his  veterans, 
ii.  32S.  Roman  mode  of  measuring  land, 
iv.  39,  40. 

Land-tax,  the  Roman  proprietors  of  public 
domains  released  from  payment  of,  i.  56. 
Quiritary  proprietorship,  embracing  ex- 
emption from  the  land-tax,  reluctantly 
given  by  the  emperors,  vii.  41S. 

Language,  varieties  of,  spoken  in  the  Roman 
empire,  iv.  301. 

Lanuvium,  birth-place  and  residence  of 
Antoninus  Pius,  vii.  395  note. 

Laodicea,  state  of,  in  the  time  of  Augustus, 
iv.  360. 

Lares,  popular  worship  of  the,  restored  by 
Augustus,  iv.  25.  The  worship  combined 
with  that  of  Augustus  himself,  26. 

Latcrensis,  L.  Juventius,  second  in  com- 
mand in  Further  Spain,  ii.  267.  Put  to 
death  by  Cassius,  267 

Laterensis,  M.  Juventius,  lieutenant  of 
Plancus,  commits  suicide,  iii.  126. 

Latin,  the  official  language  of  the  whole 
Roman  empire,  iv.  298.  Prevalence  oi 
the  Latin  language  in  the  western  prov- 
inces, 300.  Comprehensiveness,  strength, 
&c.,  of  the  Latin  language,  vii.  246. 

Latin  franchise,  the,  i.  23.  Claims  of  the 
Italian  allies  to  the,  27.  Eventual  con- 
cession of  the  privilege  to  the  Italian 
claimants,  28.  Law  of  L.  Julius  Ciesar 
for  admitting  them,  91  note  =>.  The  fran- 
chise communicated  by  Csesar  to  the  pro- 
vincials, ii.  326.  Extended  by  the  manu- 
mission of  slaves,  iv.  308.  Granted  by 
Yespasian  to  Spain,  vii.  23.  Extension  of 
the  franchise  in  the  reign  of  Antoninus 
Pius,  417.  Its  hardship  an  1 vexations, 
418.  Quiritary  proprietorship.  418.  Im- 
position of  the  legacy  duty  on  personal 
enfranchisement,  419.  Constant  degrada- 
tion of  the  character  of  the  Roman  citi- 
zenship in  the  provinces,  420.  Gradual 
Extension  of  citizenship  to  all  the  free 
population  of  the  empire,  421.  Decree  o l 
Anton ius  Caracalla,  423. 


INDEX. 


537 


Latinus,  the  mime,  his  arrogance  and  favour 
with  Domitian,  vii.  110. 

Latobrigi,  the,  join  the  Helvctii,  i.  240. 

Laws,  Ccesar’s  project  of  a complete  code  of, 
ii.  333.  Legislative  and  judicial  functions 
of  the  senate  and  the  people,  iii.  3T6.  The 
prerogative  of  initiation  assumed  by  Au- 
gustus, 3T6.  Ilis  edicts,  377.  The  edicts 
and  rescripts  of  the  emperor,  377,  378. 
Misconception  of  the  phrase  legibus  so- 
lutus , 379.  The  lex  regia , 381.  Consti- 
tutional functions  of  the  Roman  people 
under  the  empire,  386.  Functions  of  the 
senate,  392.  And  of  the  knights,  397. 
The  jurisprudence  of  Augustus,  iv.  43. 
Failure  of  the  civil  laws  in  application  to 
questions  between  foreigners,  vii.  424. 
Anomalous  relation  of  the  Jus  Civile  and 
the  Jus  Gentium  in  the  Flavian  era,  425. 
The  Jus  Honorarium  and  Perpetual  Edict 
of  the  praetor,  426.  The  provincial  edict 
of  the  prefects,  426.  Methods  and  princi- 
ples of  procedure  in  the  provinces,  427. 
Relations  of  Roman  and  native  usage,  428. 
Decline  of  public  spirit  coincident  with 
the  perfection  of  jurisprudence,  430.  Uni- 
formity without  amalgamation,  431. 

Le  gacy  duty,  imposition  of  the,  on  personal 
enfranchisement,  vii.  420. 

Legions,  pay  and  length  of  service  of  the, 
under  the  empire,  iii.  414  Complement 
of  the  legion  under  Augustus,  415.  Sta- 
tions of  the  legions  under  Tiberius,  v.  142. 
No  legion  quartered  in  Italy,  which  is 
defended  by  the  urban  cohorts  and  prte- 
torian  guards,  143.  The  discipline  of  the 
legions  strenuously  maintained  by  Tibe- 
rius, 144.  Recruited  in  the  provinces,  vi. 
258.  Permanence  of  the  constitution  of 
the  legion,  vii.  444.  List  of  the  legions 
and  their  stations  in  the  reign  of  Aurelius, 
444  note  2. 

Legislation,  power  of,  in  the  people  and 
senate,  but  subsequently  in  the  emperor, 
v.  101. 

Lemon nm,  capital  city  of  the  Pictones, 
taken  by  Duratius  and  held  for  the  Ro- 
mans, ii.  36. 

Lentulus,  P.  Cornelius,  Sura,  consul,  de- 
feated by  Spartacus,  i.  51.  Deposed  from 
his  command,  51.  Joins  Catilina’s  con- 
spiracy, 116.  Proposes  a new  ii  surrection 
of  slaves  and  criminals,  117. 

Lentulus,  Cn.  Cornelius,  appointed  to  the 
revived  office  of  censor,  i.  73. 

Lentulus  Crus,  L.  Cornelius,  elected  consul, 
ii.  75.  His  chances  of  advantages  from 
anarchy,  84.  Covets  the  house  of  Horten- 
sius  and  the  gardens  of  Caesar,  225.  Mur- 
dered in  Egypt,  246. 

Lentulus  Gaetulicus,  commander  of  the  le- 
gions cn  the  Upper  Rhine,  defies  Tiberius, 
v.  266,  348.  Put  to  death  by  Cains,  350. 

Lentulus  Marcellinus,  elected  consul,  i.  331. 
Resists  the  election  of  his  successor,  338. 

Lentulus  Spinther,  elected  consul,  i.  322. 
The  government  of  Cilicia  falls  by  lot  to 
him,  328.  Departs  for  his  province,  328. 
Retreats  before  Ccesar,  ii.  102.  Aspires  to 
the  office  of  Pontifex  Maximus,  225.  His 
osition  at  the  battle  of  Pharsalia,  230. 
oins  the  conspirators  in  the  Capitol, iii.  12. 


Lepida,  found  guilty  of  adultery  and  poison- 
ing, v.  129. 

Lepida,  Domitia,  mother  of  Messalina, 
present  at  her  daughter’s  death,  v.  435. 
Has  charge  of  the  youthful  Nero,  vi.  55. 
Her  intrigues  against  Agrippina,  454. 
Found  guilty  of  treason  and  executed, 
455. 

Lepidus,  M.  JEmilius,  great-great-grand- 
father of  the  triumvir,  six  times  princeps, 
iii.  353. 

Lepidus,  M.  A3milius,his  attempts  to  revive 
the  Marian  party,  i.  49,  64.  His  defeat 
and  death,  49. 

Lepidus,  M.  yEmilius,  interrex  in  b.o.  62, 
his  house  attacked  by  the  Clodian  mob,  i. 
437.  Appointed  governor  of  Rome  by 
Caesar,  ii.  128,  170,  173,  346.  Adheres  to 
the  principles  of  Caesar,  180.  Receives 
the  province  of  Hither  Spain,  184,  280. 
Allowed  the  honour  of  a triumph,  280. 
Designated  consul  for  b.o.  46,  281.  His 
administration  of  Rome  as  master  of  the 
horse,  346.  His  character  as  “ Caesar’s 
friend,”  348.  Accepts  the  government  of 
Hither  Spain  and  Gallia  Narbonensis,  866. 
In  Rome  at  the  time  of  Caesar’s  assassina- 
tion, iii.  8.  Supports  Antonius,  10, 15,  31. 
His  position,  15.  Surrounds  the  senate 
with  an  armed  force,  20.  Accompanies 
Antonius  to  the  forum,  22, 26.  His  speech 
to  the  people,  23.  Impatient  to  act 
against  the  liberators,  but  entertains 
Brutus,  30.  Marches  to  Spain,  93.  Urges 
the  senate  to  treat  with  Antonius,  112.  Sta- 
tioned in  Transalpine  Gaul,  and  secretly 
aids  Antonius,  124.  Antonius  joins  him, 
126,  127.  Invited  by  Octavius  to  combine 
with  Antonius,  131.  Negotiates  with  Oc- 
tavius, 134.  Conference  of  Octavius,  An- 
tonius, and  Lepidus,  and  formation  of  the 
second  triumvirate,  137.  Designated 
consul  for  b.c.  42,  138.  Narbonnese 
Gaul  and  Spain  allotted  to  him,  13S.  Con- 
sents to  the  proscription  of  his  brother 
Paulus  AEmilius,  140.  Enters  Rome  with 
his  colleagues,  142.  Appointed  consul, 
b.o.  42, 157.  Ilis  triumph  and  unpopu- 
larity, 157.  Compelled  by  his  colleagues 
to  surrender  the  command  in  Italy,  and 
Africa  assigned  to  him,  173, 185.  Refuses 
to  join  Octavius,  193.  Assists  Octavius 
in  his  war  with  Sextus  Pompeius,  19S, 
201.  Deserts  to  the  Pompeians,  and  com- 
bines with  them  against  Octavius,  202, 
Abandoned  by  his  soldiers,  203.  Submits 
to  Octavius,  who  spares  his  life,  203.  De- 
prived of  his  share  of  the  triumvirate, 
203.  Retains  the  office  of  Pontifex  Maxi- 
mus, 203,  209.  His  death,  iv.  165. 

Lepidus,  son  of  the  triumvir,  conspires 
against  Augustus,  and  is  put  to  death  by 
him,  iii.  312. 

Lepidus,  M.  iEmilins,  named  by  Augustus 
as  a possible  competitor  for  the  empire,  v. 
10.  Defends  Cn.  Piso,  80.  His  proposal 
for  diminishing  the  rewards  of  the  dela- 
tors, 181.  His  nobility  and  influence,  245. 
Married  to  Drusilla,  daughter  of  German- 
icus,  but  resigns  her  to  Caius,  305.  Put  to 
death  by  Caius,  350. 

Lesbian  wines,  iv.  316. 


538 


INDEX. 


Leuce,  Come,  town  of,  in  Arabia.  Iy.  98, 100 
note  i. 

Lexovii,  the,  compelled  to  submit  to  the 
Romans,  i.  281.  Joins  a maritime  con- 
federacy against  the  Romans,  291.  Com- 
pelled to  maintain  Ca?sar’s  soldiers,  297. 

Libels,  conduct  of  Augustus  and  Tiberius 
with  respect  to,  v.  122.  And  of  Nero,  vi. 
114. 

Libo,  Drusus,  his  intrigues  against  Tiberius 
and  suicide,  v.  89. 

Libo,  L.  Seribonius,  takes  the  command  of 
the  Pompeian  fleet,  ii.  199.  Blockades 
Brundisium,  199.  Mediates  between  Oc- 
tavius and  Sextus  Pompeius,  iii.  187. 
• flings  to  Sextus,  but  Anally  abandons 
him,  294, 

Library  of  Lucullus,  i.  83.  Of  0ctavi3, 
founded  by  her  brother  Octavius,  iii.  235. 
Of  Pollio,  supposed  to  be  purchased  by 
the  fruits  of  his  Illyrian  campaign,  ii.  336 
note'\  iii.  235.  The  first  public  library  in 
Rome  established  by  Csesar,  ii.  835.  The 
Alexandrian  Library  accidentally  burnt 
by  Caesar,  259.  Libraries  of  Trajan,  vii. 
198. 

Liburni,  the,  defeated  by  Octavius,  iii.  232. 

Licinian  rogations,  enactment  of  the,  i.  25. 

Licinianus,  the  praetorian,  his  banishment, 
vii.  105. 

Licinius  Damasippus,  abets  Juba,  king  of 
Numidia,  in  his  insolence,  ii.  168. 

Licinus,  his  early  life,  iv.  157.  His  tyranny 
as  procurator  of  Gaul,  157.  His  adroit  ex- 
culpation of  himself  to  Augustus,  15S. 
His  tomb,  158. 

Ligarius,  <i,  Cicero’s  speech  for,  ii.  344. 
Joins  the  conspiracy  against  Caesar’s  life, 
379. 

Ligurians,  their  hostility  to  the  Massilians, 
i.  194.  Besiege  Antipolis  and  Nicaea,  195. 
Defeated  by  the  Romans,  and  their  terri- 
tory given  to  the  Massilians,  195.  Origin 
of  the  Ligurians,  213,  Their  final  subju- 
gation effected  by  Augustus,  iv.  87. 

Limyra,  Caius  Caesar  dies  at,  iv.  219. 

Lingones,  a Gallic  tribe,  refuse  to  allow  a 
passage  to  tbe  fugitive  Helvetii,  i.  252. 
Two  legions  stationed  in  the  country  of 
the,  405. 

Liscus,  the  vergobret  of  the  JSdui,  discovers 
the  treachery  of  Dumnorix  to  Cttsar,  i. 
249. 

Litavicus,  commander  of  the  AEduan  levies 
under  Caesar,  revolts,  ii.  21.  Pardoned, 
21. 

Literature  of  the  Romans,  influence  of  that 
of  the  Greeks  on  the,  ii.  417.  Naevus  and 
Lucilius  the  champions  of  the  old  Roman 
literature,  418.  Imitative  character  of 
Roman  literature,  421.  General  purity 
and  terseness  of  style  in  the  Augus- 
tan writers,  iv.  435,  Titius  Livins  and 
his  history,  436.  Virgil,  439.  Horace, 
449,  152.  Propertius,  455.  Tibullus,  460. 
Ovid,  462.  Decline  and  suppression  of 
literature  in  the  reign  of  Tiberius,  v. 
261 ; vi.  183.  No  restriction  on  writing 
among  the  Romans,  183.  This  indulgence 
accepted  in  compensation  for  restriction 
in  publication,  183.  Consideration  of  the 
extent  of  the  class  of  readers,  184.  Prices 


of  the  hooks  in  Rome.  185.  Facilities  at* 
tending  the  composition  and  multiplica* 
tion  of  books,  186.  Characteristics  of  the 
popular  literature  of  the  time,  186.  Fash- 
ion of  historical  composition,  187.  Extra- 
ordinary activity  of  the  elder  Pliny,  187. 
Discouragement  of  contemporary  history, 
188.  Vespasian’s  liberal  endowment  of 
lireratnre,  vii.  28.  Effect  of  the  Flavian 
reaction  on  the  tone  of  Roman  literature, 
222.  Comparison  of  Claudian  and  Flavian 
writers,  222  et  seq.  Poets  of  the  Flavian 
age,  228.  The  historians  of  the  same  pe- 
riod, 233.  Preference  of  the  Romans  for 
biography  to  history,  24S.  Collection  of 
private  correspondence,  250.  Pliny’s  ac- 
count of  the  true  man  of  letters — the  elder 
Pliny,  264. 

Livia  Drusilla,  wife  of  Tiberius  Claudius, 
and  mother  of  Tiberius  the  emperor  and 
Drusus,  carried  off  and  married  by  Octa- 
vius, iii.  218;  iv.  124.  Her  early  history, 
manners,  and  character,  iv.  124,  125. 
Jealous  of  Octavia,  129.  Urges  the  mar- 
riage of  Julia  with  Tiberius,  170.  Sus- 
pected of  hastening  the  end  of  Caius  and 
Lucius  Ca?sar,  219.  Secures  the  succes- 
sion for  Tiberius,  221.  Believed  to  have 
counselled  Augustus  to  clemency  in  Cin- 
na’s  case,  223.  Her  intrigues  against 
Agrippa  Posthumus,  253.  Summons 
Tiberius  to  the  death -bed  of  Augustus, 
2S7;  v.  9.  Conceals  the  emperor’s  de- 
cease until  his  arrival,  10.  Adopted  into 
the  Julian  family  with  the  title  of  Au- 
gusta, 13.  Perhaps  instructs  Plancina  to 
thwart  Agrippina,  61.  Believed  accessory 
to  the  death  of  Germanicus,  72.  Does  not 
appear  at  his  funeral,  74.  Screens  Plan- 
cina, 86.  Her  secret  influence  over  Tibe- 
rius, 92.  The  temple  voted  to  her  by  the 
provincials,  186.  Her  death  and  char- 
acter, 210,  211.  Her  friends  persecuted 
by  Tiberius,  216. 

Livia,  or  Livilla,  sister  of  Germanicus  and 
wife  of  Drusus,  brings  forth  twin  chil- 
dren, v.  73.  Intrigues  with  Sejanus  and 
poisoDS  her  husband,  176.  Sejanus  de- 
mands her  in ‘marriage,  186.  Affianced  to 
him,  219.  With  Tiberius  at  Caprece,  222. 
Her  guilt  established,  she  is  starved  to 
death,  231. 

Livia,  sister  of  the  emperor  Caius,  impli- 
cated in  a conspiracy  against  her  brother, 

v.  850.  Bauished,  351.  Recalled  from 
banishment,  363. 

Livy,  character  of  his  history,  iv.  457.  Call- 
ed by  Augustus  “a  Pompeian,”  437.  As- 
sists the  studies  of  Claudius,  437.  Services 
performed  by  him  for  his  countrymen, 
43S.  Loss  sustained  by  us  through  the 
disappearance  of  the  latter  decades,  437. 
His  “ Dialogues,”  438.  Frequents  the 
rhetorical  schools,  439.  His  history  com- 
manded by  Caius  to  be  removed  from 
the  lit varies,  v.  338.  His  works  compared 
with  those  of  Tacitus,  vii.  233. 

Locusta,  the  professor  of  poisoning,  v.  456; 

vi.  285. 

Lollia  Paulina,  the  richest  woman  in  Rome, 
Pliny’s  account  of  her,  v.  807.  Wife  of  P. 
Memmius  Regulus,  307.  Espoused  and 


INDEX. 


539 


shortly  afterwards  repudiated  by  Cains  | 
Ccesar,  307.  Banished  by  Claudius  with  I 
the  loss  of  her  fort  une,  443. 

Lollius,  M.,  elected  to  the  consulship,  iii.  j 
363.  Defeated  in  Caul,  iv.  156.  Accorn-  : 
panies  Caius  Ca?sar  into  the  East,  214.  De- 
nounced by  Caius  Caesar,  217.  His  death, 
217.  Father  of  Lollia  Paulina,  v.  306. 

Lollius  Urbicus,  defeats  the  Brigantes,  and 
builds  the  wall  of  Antoninus  in  North 
Britain,  vii.  400. 

Londinium  in  the  time  of  Claudius,  vi.  17. 
Sacked  by  the  Iceni,  47.  In  the  time  of 
HadriaD.  Vii.  346. 

Lorium,  residence  of  Antoninus  Pius  at,  vii. 
403. 

Lucanus,  M.,  Annaeus,  takes  part  in  Piso’s 
conspiracy  against  Nero,  vi.  146.  Said  to 
ha^e  betrayed  his  mother,  149.  Put  to 
death,  149.  His  early  compliments  to 
Nero,  152,  236.  Examination  of  his 
“ Pharsalia  ” as  a history  of  mind  and 
opinion  of  the  period,  235-244.  Char- 
acteristics of  Lucan  and  of  his  contempo- 
raries, 239.  His  deficiency  in  imagina- 
tion, 211.  His  affectation  of  encyclopedic 
knowledge,  242.  His  birthplace  and  pa- 
rentage, 243  note  l.  His  “ Pharsalia,” 
243;  vii.  223.  Compared  with  Silius  Ital- 
ians, vii.  223,  224.  And  with  Tacitus,  235- 
243. 

Lucca,  levees  of  Caesar  at,  in  697,  i.  532. 

Lucceius,  L.,  the  historian,  sues  for  the  con- 
sulship, i.  168. 

Lucilius,  C.,  a champion  of  the  old  Homan 
literature,  ii.  419. 

Lucilla,  daughter  of  the  emperor  M.  Aure- 
lius, bethrothed  to  Yerus,  vii.  453. 

Lucretius,  effect  of  his  poem  “ On  the  Na- 
ture of  Things,”  ii.  353. 

Lucretius,  Q.,  nominated  by  Augustus  to 
the  consulship,  iv.  133. 

Lucullus,  Andreas,  heads  a revolt  of  the 
Jews  in  the  Cyrenaica,  vii.  310. 

Lucullus,  L.  Licinius,  proconsul  in  Asia,  i. 
44.  His  attempts  to  reform  the  provin- 
cial administration,  44.  Superseded  in 
his  command,  45.  His  views  compared 
with  those  of  his  successor  Pompeius,  45. 
His  character,  65.  His  wealth,  and  the 
use  he  made  of  it,  83,  84.  .Receives  the 
honour  of  a triumph,  140.  Intrigue  of 
Memmius  with  the  wife  of  Lucullus’s 
brother,  161.  Lucullus's  life  in  danger, 
173.  His  advice  to  Cicero,  185. 

Lucullus,  Marcus,  his  invasion  of  Maesia, 
iv.  90. 

Lucullus,  formerly  prefect  of  Britain,  put  to 
death,  vii.  147. 

Ludi  Apollinares  exhibited  in  Eomu  by 
Brutus,  iii.  73. 

Ludi  Sa>culares  of  Augustus,  iii.  375;  iv. 

1 12-145.  Of  Claudius,  v.  421. 

Ludi  Maximi  of  Nero,  vi.  111. 

Lugdunensis,  the  provincia,  organization  of, 
by  Augustus,  iv.  75. 

Lugdunum,  founded  by  Plancus,  iv.  75.  Its 
site,  great  roads  from  it  to  the  Atlantic 
and  British  Channel,  its  wealth,  popula- 
tion, and  importance  as  a colony,  76.  The 
commercial  centre  of  the  Gauls,  76.  The 
imperial  residence  of  Lugdunum,  76.  Its 


mint,  76.  Its  rhetorical  schools,  S2.  Altar 
dedicated  to  Augustus  and  Pome  by  the 
Gauls  at  Lugdunum,  iv.  175.  Imperial 
auction  of  Caius  at  Lugdunum,  v.  349. 

Lupercalia,  revived  by  Augustus,  iii.  375. 

Lupercus.  See  Memmius. 

Lupus,  one  of  the  assassins  of  Caius,  put  to 
death,  v.  369. 

Lupus,  prefect  of  Egypt,  his  severe  meas- 
ures against  the  Jews  in  his  province,  vii. 
285.  Worsted  in  several  encounters  with 
them,  311. 

Lusitania,  Caesar’s  conquest  of  the  districts 
of,  north  of  the  Tagus,  i.  15G. 

Lusius  Quietus,  a Moorish  captain  of  mer- 
cenaries, entrusted  by  Trajan  with  a com- 
mand in  the  East,  vii.  306.  Quells  a re- 
volt of  the  Jews  in  Mesopotamia,  310. 
Urged  by  his  soldiers  to  dispute  the  em- 
pire with  Hadrian,  328.  Sent  by  Hadrian 
to  Mauretania,  331.  His  intrigues  and 
death,  336. 

Lutorius  Priscus,  denounced  by  Haterius  for 
his  verses  on  the  supposed  death  of  Dru- 
sus,  and  executed  by  the  senate,  v.  126. 

Lycia,  autonomous  states  of,  iv.  10S.  Com- 
pensated by  Augustus,  108.  Deprived  of 
its  autonomy,  vii.  23. 

Lydia,  destruction  of  twelve  cities  of,  by  an 
earthquake,  v.  146. 


MACEDONIA,  Roman  province  of,  extent 
of  the,  i.  33.  The  government  of,  cov- 
eted, 35.  Assigned  by  Clodius  to  Piso, 
305.  Seized  by  Brutus,  iii.  158. 

Maser,  Clodius,  commander  in  Africa,  claims 
the  empire,  vi.  2S2.  His  death,  295. 
Macro,  Sertorius,  appointed  captain  of  the 
Praetorian  guards,  and  entrusted  by  Tibe- 
rius with  the  arrest  of  Sejanus,  v.  223. 
Distinctions  heaped  upon  Macro  by  the 
citizens,  228.  Becomes  almost  as  obnox- 
ious as  Sejanus,  243.  Put  to  death  by 
order  of  Sejanus,  302. 

Maecenas,  C.  Cilnius,  applied  to  by  Pollio  on 
Virgil’s  behalf,  iii.  177.  Draws  up  the 
treaty  of  Brundisium,  1S3.  Renews  ne- 
gotiations between  Augustus  and  Anto- 
nius,  195.  His  origin  and  career,  214-216. 
His  freedom  as  counsellor  to  Augustus,  iv. 
149.  His  easy  temper,  149.  The  representa- 
tive of  progress,  151.  The  first  minister  of 
the  empire,  152.  His  political  influence 
as  patron  of  literature,  153.  His  domestic 
troubles,  154.  Prescription  of  Antoniua 
Musa  for  his  sleeplessness,  194.  Ilis 
death,  194.  His  manners  and  character, 
194.  Causes  of  his  reputation  with  pos- 
terity, 195. 

Maesia,  first  invaded  by  M.  Lucullus,  iv.  90. 
Annexed  by  .Tiberius  to  Illyricum,  90. 
Revolt  in,  extinguished  by  L.  Piso,  183. 
Condition  of,  at  the  end  of  the  reign  of 
Tiberius,  v.  267.  Secured  by  Trajan,  vii 
196.  Hadrian’s  campaign  in,  vii.  335. 
Mainz,  Trajan’s  bridge  at,  vii.  105. 

Mai  us,  the  name  of  the  month,  changed  to 
Claudius,  vi.  159. 

Majestas,  the  law  of,  its  origin,  v.  115.  Dis- 
tinction between  majestas  and  perduel- 
lio , 115.  The  law  of  Majestas  composed 


540 


INDEX. 


of  the  Lex  Apnleia,  Lex  Yaria,  Lex  Cor- 
nelia, and  Lex  Julia  de  Maj  estate,  115-118. 
Definition  of  it  by  the  Julian  law,  118. 
Few  trials  for  maiestas  under  Augustus. 

110.  Its  application  extended  by  Tibe- 
rius to  pasquinades  and  abusive  words, 
120,  121.  Constructive  majestas,  125. 
Cases  of  Falanius  and  Rubriue,  125. 
Cases  of  Granins  Marcellus,  Ennius,  and 
others,  125-129.  Extravagances  of  the 
law,  137.  Nero’s  temperate  i>roceedings  in 
cases  of  majesty,  vi.  114. 

Malliu9,  C.,  an  adherent  of  Catilina,  i.  131. 
Kaises  the  standard  of  revolt  in  Etruria, 
131.  Declared  an  enemy  of  the  state,  131. 

Mamurra,  chief  of  Ciesar’s  engineering  de- 
partment, his  skill  and  wealth,  ii.  155. 
His  house  on  the  Cadian  hill,  iv.  378. 

Mancipi,  and  necmancipi,  in  the  old  Roman 
law  of  property,  ii.  413. 

Manilius,  the  author  of  the  Mauilian  law, 
conferring  absolute  power  in  the  East 
upon  Pompeius,  i.  75. 

Manilius,  his  poem  on  astronomy  and  astrol- 
ogy, not  mentioned  by  any  ancient  writer, 
v.  262.  Period  in  which  he  flourished, 
263  note. 

Manlius,  his  conquests  in  Gaul,  i.  197.  De- 
feated by  the  Cimbri,  203. 

Mantua,  confiscation  of,  by  Octavius,  to  sat- 
isfy the  legionaries,  iii.  177. 

Marble,  trade  in,  among  the  ancients,  iv.  318. 

Marcella,  sister  of  Octavius,  manied  to  M. 
Agrippa,  iii.  331 ; iv.  127.  Divorced  by 
him,  135.  Married  to  Julius  Antonius, 

111.  271  note  1 ; iv.  136,  183  note. 

Marcellus,  M.  Claudius,  elected  consul,  ii. 

51.  His  hostility  to  Caesar,  51.  His  de- 
cree about  the  assignment  of  provinces 
aimed  at  Caesar,  60.  Whom  he  insults  by 
ill  treatment  of  a Transpadane  Gaul,  61. 
Retires  to  Mytilene,  343.  Endeavors  to 
obtain  his  recall  to  Rome,  344.  Cicero’s 
oration  “pro  Marcello,”  344.  He  is  re- 
called, but  assassinated  at  Athens,  344. 

Marcellus,  first  husband  of  Ootavia,  iii.  183. 

Marcellus,  M.,  son  of  Octavia,  betrothed  to 
the  daughter  of  Sextus  Pompeius,  iii.  188, 
217.  Marries  Julia,  daughter  of  Augustus, 
iv.  126.  Designated  aMile,  and  released 
from  the  “ Lex  Annalis,”  iii.  338 ; iv.  128. 
More  popular  than  Agrippa,  128.  His  ill- 
ness and  death  at  Baia,  131, 132.  His  ob- 
sequies, 132.  First  tenant  of  the  Mauso- 
leum Augusti,  133.  His  death  imputed  to 
Livia,  133.  The  “Theatrum  Marcelli,” 
133.  His  funeral  oration  pronounced  by 
Augustus,  133.  Virgil’s  verses  his  imper- 
ishable monument,  133. 

Marcellus,  Granius,  accused  of  constructive 
treason,  v.  125. 

Marcellus,  C.  Claudius,  elected  consul,  ii.  58, 
75.  Appeals  to  Caesar’s  generosity  on 
behalf  of  his  brother,  844. 

Marcellus  Eprius,  a noted  delator,  vi.  168. 
His  declamation  against  Paetus  Thrasea, 
171.  His  rewards,  172. 

Marcia,  widow  of  Hortensius,  married  to 
Cato,  ii.  194. 

Vlarcia  Furnilla,  wife  of  Titus,  vii.  46. 

klarciana,  Trajan’s  6ister.  her  magnanimity, 
vii.  179. 


Marcius  Rex,  his  conquests  in  Gnul,  i 197. 

Marcomanni,  the,  transplant  themselvefl 
from  the  sources  of  the  Danube  into  Bo- 
hemia, iv.  237,  242.  Formation  of  the 
kingdom  of  Maroboduus,  242,  243.  Cam- 
paign of  Tiberius  against  them,  245.  Their 
war  with  the  Cherusci,  v.  53.  Wars  of  M. 
Aurelius  with  them,  vii.  464,  474. 

Mariamne,  the  Asmonian  princess,  married 
to  Herod  the  Great,  iii.  304.  His  love  and 
jealousy  of  her,  308.  Put  to  death  by 
him,  308. 

Mariamne,  daughter  of  Herod  Agrippa,  vi 
419. 

Marian,  or  popular  party,  at  Rome,  t!  etr 
claims  the  weak  point  in  the  body  politic, 
i.  S7.  The  Marian  party  represented  by 
Caesar,  90.  Who  obtains  the  rehabilitation 
of  several  of  them,  101.  The  trophies  of 
Marius  restored  by  Caesar,  104.  Weapons 
of  the  Marian  party  in  Caesar’s  hands, 
106, 108. 

Marillinus,  grandfather  of  Hadrian,  first  sen- 
ator of  the  Hadrian  branch  of  the  iElian 
family,  vii.  323. 

Marius,  his  proscriptions  and  massacres,  i. 
31.  His  death,  31.  His  bust  boldly 
exhibited  by  Caesar,  101.  His  trophies 
restored  by  Caesar,  105.  His  victory  at 
Aquaj  Sextiae,  204.  And  at  Vercellae, 
206. 

Maria,  the  younger,  his  offer  to  the  Sam- 
nites,  i.  31. 

Marius  Priscus  condemned  to  banishment 
for  malversation  in  Africa,  vii.  434. 

Marobuduus,  or  Marbod,  formation  of  his 
kingdom  in  southern  Germany,  iv.  243. 
His  army,  243.  Compared  to  Pyrrhus  and 
Antioch  us,  244.  Campaign  of  Tiberius 
against  him,  245.  Occupies  the  land  of 
the  Boii,  founds  a kingdom  there,  and 
trains  his  army  after  the  Roman  model, 
243,  244;  v.  53.  Accepts  terms  of  peace 
from  Tiberius,  iv.  245.  Refuses  to  join 
the  Cheruscans,  275.  His  dominions  in- 
vaded by  the  Cherusci.  who  defeat  him, 
v.  53,  54.  Driven  by  Catualda  across  the 
Danube,  54.  Granted  shelter  within  the 
Roman  dominions,  54.  Dies  at  Ravenna, 
55. 

Marriage  amongst  the  Romans,  ii.  273,  409. 
Remarks  on  the  principle  of  Roman  mar- 
riage, iv.  30.  Marriage  fallen  into  dis- 
favour and  desuetude,  32.  Influence  of 
the  freedwomen,  33.  Servitude  of  mar- 
ried women,  34.  Struggles  of  the  women 
against  it,  35.  The  Oppiau  and  Yoconian 
laws,  36.  Legislation  of  the  republic  for 
enforcing  marriage,  36.  Penalties  of  celi- 
bacy and  rewards  of  marriage,  39. 

Mars  the  Avenger,  temple  to,  vowed  by 
Augustus,  iv.  24.  116. 

Marsi,  a German  tribe,  severely  handled  by 
Germanicus,  v.  30. 

Martial,  patronized  by  Domitian  vii.  186. 
His  works  examined  and  compared  with 
those  of  Horace,  232. 

Martina,  the  poisoner,  a creature  of  Plane!* 
na,  v.  69.  79.  Her  death,  79. 

Martins  Turbo,  governor  of  Palestine,  vii. 
314,  332.  Relieves  Lupus  in  Alexandria, 
311.  His  amazement  at  the  fanaticism 


INDEX. 


541 


of  the  Jews,  814.  Appointed  by  Hadrian 
governor  of  Palestine,  331.  And  in  com- 
mand in  Dacia,  336. 

Marullus,  C.  Epidus,  tribune,  tears  down 
the  crown  from  Ctesar’s  statue,  ii.  370. 
His  recall  from  banishment  demanded  by 
Caesar,  iii.  18. 

Massa  Baebius,  a delator,  vii.  180. 

Masintha,  a Numidian  prince,  protected  by 
Ctesar,  i.  144. 

Massilia,  foundation  of  the  city  of,  t 193. 
Its  position  and  resources,  194.  Frequent 
attacks  of  the  Ligurians,  194.  The  terri- 
tory of  the  Ligurians  given  to  the  Mas- 
silians,  195.  Attached  to  the  cause  of  the 
Poman  aristocracy,  ii.  67.  Declares  itself 
in  favour  of  the  Pompeian  party,  126. 
Defended  by  Domitius,  127, 129, 143.  Be- 
sieged on  land  by  Trebonius,  and  at  sea 
by  D.  Brutus  for  Caesar,  130.  Their  fleet 
defeated  by  Brutus,  142.  Description  of 
the  city  at  this  time,  155,  156.  The  im- 
mense rampart  of  Trebonius  on  the  land 
side.  156.  Feigned  capitulation  and  treach- 
ery of  the  besieged,  159.  The  siege  re- 
sumed, 159.  Its  final  submission  and 
treatment  at  the  hands  of  the  Cesarians, 
173;  iv.  73.  Withdrawal  of  its  depend- 
ents Antipolis  and  Agathe,  74.  Its  lite- 
rary eminence,  82. 

Masora,  the,  described,  vii.  315. 

Maternus,  Curiatius,  poet,  his  tragedies, 
vii.  30,  31.  Put  to  death  for  declaiming 
against  tyrants,  147. 

Mathematicae,  astrologers,  and  Chaldeans, 
edicts  against,  vii.  111. 

Matidia,  her  daughter  Sabina  married  to 
Hadrian,  vii.  326’.  Bears  Trajan’s  remains 
to  Pome,  337. 

Matius,  Caesar’s  friend,  contributes  towards 
the  expense  of  the  shows  in  honour  of 
Caesar,  iii.  63. 

Mattium,  the  stronghold  of  the  Chatti,  de- 
stroyed by  Germanicus,  v.  31. 

Mauretania,  the  stronghold  of  the  king  of, 
attacked  by  Cn.  Pompeius  ii.  288.  Con- 
stituted a Roman  province  by  Octavius, 
iii.  235.  The  kingdom  given  "by  Augus- 
tus to  Juba,  iv.  91 ; v.  142.  Disturbances 
in,  in  the  reign  of  Hadrian,  vii.  334.  Hon- 
oured with  a visit  of  the  emperor  Ha- 
drian, 351. 

Mauricus,  his  jest  at  Yeiento,  the  delator, 
vii.  166. 

Mausoleum,  or  Moles  Hadriani,  described, 
vii.  383,  405. 

Media  Atropatene  invaded  by  Antonius,  who 
is  compelled  to  retreat,  iii.  222. 

Melcarth,  or  Hercules,  temple  of,  at  Tyre, 
plundered  by  Caesar,  ii.  276. 

Mediterranean  Sea,  the  centre  of  the  Poman 
empire,  iv.  311.  The  navigation  of  the 
ancients  on  this  sea,  312.  Pome  the  em- 
porium of  its  commerce,  313.  Staples  of 
commerce,  314.  Spices,  &c.,  from  the 
East,  315.  Paper  from  Egypt,  315.  Wool- 
lens and  wine,  316. 

Mela,  Anna?us,  proscribed,  vi.  162.  His 
character  and  death,  163. 

Melito,  Bishop  of  Sardis,  his  martyrdom, 
vii.  490. 

Vlemmius,  C.,  his  intrigue  with  Lucullus’s 


brother’s  wife,  i.  161.  A candidate  for 
the  consulship,  360. 

Memmius,  P.,  Pegulus,  consul,  arrests  Seja- 
nus,  v.  223.  Compelled  by  Caius  to  di- 
vorce his  wife,  Lollia  Paulina,  307. 

Memmius  Pegulus,  the  prince  of  delators, 
vii.  130. 

Memnon,  the  vocal,  vii.  377  note 2.  Visited 
by  the  empress  Sabina,  377. 

Meiiapii,  a tribe  of  the  Belgae,  i.  226.  Join 
the  confederation  against  the  Romans,  267. 
Join  the  Veneti  in  a maritime  confedera- 
tion, 290.  Attempts  of  Caesar  to  reduce 
them,  297.  Compelled  by  the  Germans  to 
cross  the  Rhine,  366.  Sabinus  and  Cotta 
sent  by  Cajsar  into  their  country,  3S3. 
Chastised  by  them,  383.  And  again  by 
Ca?sar,  399.  Checked  by  Labienus,  400. 

Menecrates,  Pompeian  admiral,  defeats  Cal- 
visius  in  the  bay  of  Cuina.1,  iii.  194.  His 
death,  194. 

Menodorus,  the  Pompeian  admiral,  urges 
Sextus  Pompeius  to  seize  the  triumvirs, 
iii.  188.  Carries  over  to  Augustus  a fleet 
with  three  legions  on  board,  193.  Claimed 
by  Antonius  as  a slave,  194.  Perhaps  the 
Menas  of  Horace,  194  note  >.  Returns  to 
the  standard  of  Sextus,  but  betrays  his 
trust  a second  time,  199. 

Mesopotamia,  successes  of  Crassus  in,  414. 
Great  numbers  of  Jews  in,  308.  Annexed 
to  the  empire  by  Trajan,  vii.  308.  Insur- 
rection of  the  Jews  in  Mesopotamia,  309, 
310.  Quelled  by  Lusius  Quietus,  310. 
Relinquished  by  Hadrian,  313, 331.  Ceded 
to  Pome,  459. 

Messala  Niger,  M.  Valerius,  elected  consul, 
i.  148.  Takes  an  active  part  in  the  prose- 
cution of  Clodius,  148. 

Messala,  M.  Valerius,  a candidate  for  the 
consulship,  i.  360.  Elected  consul,  433. 
Submits  to  Antonius,  iii.  172.  Commands 
an  army  for  Octavius,  200.  Abandons  the 
senatorian  cause,  forsakes  Antonius  for 
Octavius,  commands  in  the  war  against 
Sextus  Pompeius,  and  defeats  the  Salassi, 
216,  233.  Messala  the  first  Augustan  pre- 
fect of  the  city,  403 ; iv.  145.  Deputed  by 
the  senate  to  offer  the.  title  of  “Pater 
Patriie”  to  Augustus,  56.  Earns  a tri- 
umph over  Gaul  on  the  banks  of  the 
Adour,  70.  Resigns  his  prefecture  of 
Rome,  145.  Patron  of  Tibullus  and  liter- 
ary men,  460. 

Messala,  Valerius,  Barbatus,  father  of  the 
empress  Messalina,  v.  400. 

Messana,  naval  fight  in  the  harbour  of,  ii. 
250.  Plundered  by  two  armies  in  one 
night,  iii.  202. 

Messalina,  wife  of  Claudius,  mother  of  Bri- 
tannicus  and  Octavia,  her  character  and 
influence,  v.  400-402.  Her  favourites, 
Narcissus  and  Polybius,  411.  Her  pas- 
sion for  Mnester,  a dancer,  414.  Destro3rs 
Valerius  Asiaticus,  416.  Flatteied  by 
Vitellius,  418.  Her  hatred  of  Agrippina, 
423.  Her  amour  with  Silius,  425.  And 
marriage  with  him,  427.  Incredibility 
and  examination  of  the  story,  427-429 
The  freedmen  combine  against  her,  429. 
Her  nuptial  orgies,  431.  Her  meeting 
with  Claudius,  433.  Her  death,  434-486. 


542 


INDEX. 


Messius,  C.,  a Ca3sarian,  defended  by  Cicero, 
i.  353. 

4 Metamorphoses”  of  Ovid,  remarks  on  the, 
iv.  463. 

Metellus  Celer,  the  pnetor,  sent  to  watch 
the  movemei  cs  of  Catilina,  i.  132.  Pre- 
vents him  from  crossing  the  Apennines 
in  Gaul,  132.  His  lotter  of  remonstrance 
to  Cicero,  142.  Elected  consul,  160. 
Thrown  into  prison  by  the  tribune  Fla- 
vius, 162.  Ilis  hostility  to  Pompeius, 
161,  162,  166.  Compelled  to  swear  obe- 
dience to  Ciesar’s  agrarian  law,  173. 

Metellus  Creticus,  L.  Ciecilius,  attempts 
to  prevent  Ciesar  from  robbing  the  treas- 
ury of  Rome,  ii.  125. 

Metellus  Nepos,  his  government  of  Spain,  i. 
30.  Strikes  the  signal  Hag  on  the  Janicu- 
lum,  103.  Elected  a tribune,  134.  Com- 
bines with  Caesar  in  harassing  the  nobles, 
141.  His  violence,  142.  Deprived  of  his 
tribuneship  by  the  senate,  143.  Flies  to 
the  camp  of  Pompeius,  143.  Elected  con- 
sul, 822. 

Metellus  Creticus,  Q.,  honoured  with  a tri- 
umph, i.  140. 

Metellus  Pius,  tribute  imposed  upon  Spain 
by,  i.  157. 

Miletus,  city  of,  in  the  time  of  Augustus,  iv. 
860. 

Milo,  Annius,  opposes  Clodius  with  a band 
of  gladiators,  i.  822.  Renewal  of  his  con- 
tests with  Clodius,  380,  359.  A candidate 
for  the  consulship,  435.  His  encounter 
with  Clodius  on  the  Appian  way,  trial, 
and  exile,  436-489.  Ilis  answer  to  Cicero, 
439.  His  quarrel  with  Sallustius,  ii.  44. 
Excluded  from  the  amnesty  granted  by 
Ciesar,  1S2.  Joins  Caelius  in  an  insur- 
rection against  Ciesar  in  Italy,  202.  De- 
feated before  Capua  and  slain  at  Cosa, 
202. 

Milichus,  freedman  of  Scnevinus,  discloses 
Piso’s  plot,  vi.  148,  149.  His  rewards, 
151. 

Mimes,  Domitian’s  measures  against  the, 
vii.  109. 

Minerva,  temple  of,  dedicated  by  Octavius, 
iii.  314.  Restored  by  Domitian,  vii.  118. 
His  chosen  patrouess,  1.51. 

Minucianus,  husband  of  Julia,  aspires  to  the 
empire,  v.  368. 

Mines,  revenue  derived  from,  iii.  423. 

Mischna,  estimation  iu  which  the  com- 
mentary of  the,  was  held  by  the  Jews,  vii. 
283. 

Misenum,  harbour  of,  visited  by  the  Cili- 
eian  pirates,  i.  47  note.  Villas  of  the  Ro- 
mans on  the  heights  of,  iv.  363.  Pliny’s 
villa  at,  vii.  51. 

Misenum,  treaty  of,  iii.  187. 

Mithras,  the  Tyrian  Hercules  sacrificed  to, 
l»y  the  Cilician  pirates,  i.  48. 

Mithric  ates,  king  of  Pontus,  his  contests 
with  Rome,  i.  34.  Haughty  rejection  of 
his  proposed  alliance  with  Sertorius,  40. 
Ills  cause  viewed  with  favour  by  pro- 
vincials in  the  East,  42.  His  charactei, 
43.  His  treatment  of  Aqui'ius,  42  note. 
defeated  by  Sulla,  44,  Again  appears  in 
the  field,  44.  Defeated  by  Pompeius,  45, 
186  Matures  a new  combination  against 


Rome,  137.  Destroys  himself  on  the  re 
volt  of  his  son  Pharnaces,  138. 

Mithridates,  his  claims  to  the  throne  of 
Parthia,  i.  350. 

Mithridates,  king  of  Pergamus,  marches  to 
the  assistance  of  Ca?sar  in  Egypt,  ii.  262. 
Reduces  Pelusium  and  routs  Ptolmauis’s 
troops,  262.  At  the  battle  of  the  Nile, 
263. 

Mithridates,  king  of  Commagene,  iv.  113. 

Mithridates,  receives  the  kingdom  of  IJho 
Bosphorus  from  Claudius,  v.  3S0. 

Moguntiacum  (Mentz),  the  capital  of  Upper 
Germany,  vi,  389.  Monument  to  the 
honour  of  Drussus  at,  iv.  1S5.  Attacked 
by  the  Germans,  but  saved  by  the  4th 
and  45th  legions,  vi.  398.  Attempt  of  th? 
Chatti  to  seize  it,  vii.  82.  Trajan’s  bridge 
at,  177. 

Molo,  the  rhetorician  of  Rhodes,  instructs 
Ciesar  and  Cicero,  i.  97,  note  • . 

Mona,  rout  of  the  Druids  in,  vi.  41. 

Momeces,  the  Parthian,  taken  into  favour 
by  Antonius,  iii.  221. 

Monarchy  manifestly  indispensable  to  the 
Romans  in  the  time  of  Augustus,  iii.  428. 
The  Roman  conception  of  constitutional 
monarchy,  iv.  7.  The  prospect  of  mon- 
archy not  discouraging  to  the  Romans, 
48. 

Montanus  Curtius,  charged  by  Nero  with  a 
dereliction  of  senatorial  duties,  vi.  171. 
His  punishment,  172. 

Morini,  a Belgic  tribe,  i.  226.  J oins  the  con- 
federation against  the  Romans,  276.  Join 
also  a maritime  confederation,  290.  C;e- 
sar’s  attempts  to  chastise  them,  297. 
Punished  by  Labienus,  383.  Defeated  by 
C.  Carrinas,iv.  70. 

Mucia,  wife  of  Pompeius,  divorced  by  him, 
i.  160. 

Mucianus,  Lucianus,  made  proconsul  of 
Syria  by  Nero,  vi.  296.  Espouses  the 
cause  of  Vespasian,  349.  Advances  from 
Berytus  westward,  351.  Rebukes  the 
haste  of  Antonius  Primus,  357.  Con- 
firms the  offers  of  Antonius  to  Vitellius, 
862.  Enters  Rome;  his  strong  measures 
there,  376,  377.  Puts  to  death  the  son  of 
Vitellius,  and  stays  the  defection  of  the 
legions  in  Gaul,  881, 382.  Sends  reinforce- 
ments into  Gaul, 402. 

Mull  of  Galloway,  Agricola’s  view  of  Ire- 
land from  the,  vii.  73. 

Mummius  Lupercus,  commander  in  Lower 
Germany,  sent  against  Civilis,  vi.  389. 
Driven  by  Civilis  from  the  island  of  tho 
Batavi  into  Castra  Vetera,  389.  Besieged 
in  Castra  Vetera,  392.  Sent  captive  to  tho 
prophetess  Veleda,  but  slaughtered  on  the 
way  to  Lippe,  402. 

Munda,  battle  of,  ii.  316,  317. 

Mundus,  Decius,  and  Paulina,  story  of,  vi. 

202. 

Murcus,  L.  Statius,  joins  the  conspirators 
after  Ciesar’s  murder,  iii.  12.  Places  him- 
self under  the  orders  of  Cassius,  109. 
Commands  the  republican  fleets,  161.  Cuts 
off  two  triumviral  legions,  168. 

Murena,  L.  Licinius.  his  unsuccessful  at- 
tempts to  reduce  the  Cilician  pirates,  i. 
48.  Elected  consul,  133.  Prosecuted  uu- 


INDEX. 


543 


successfully  for  bribery  by  Sulpicius, 
188. 

Murena,  Licinius,  joins  a conspiracy  against 
the  life  of  Augustus,  iii.  3G7;  iv.  134. 

Museum,  the,  Alexandrian,  vii.  371. 

Musonius  Rufus  harangues  the  Flavians,  vi. 
368.  Exempted  from  conscription  by 
Vespasian,  vii,  32. 

Mutilation  of  children,  Domitian’s  law 
against,  vii.  107. 

Mutina,  D.  Brutus  besieged  by  Antonins 
in,  iii.  101.  Attempts  of  the  consuls  Hir- 
tius  and  Pansa  to  relieve  him,  115-119. 
Battle  between  the  republicans  and  Anto- 
nians before,  163. 

Mylse,  head-quarters  of  the  Caesarean  fleet 
at,  iii.  201.  Defeat  of  the  Pompeians  at, 
199. 

Mytilene,  siege  of,  i.  95. 


JEYII7S,  the  champion  of  early  Roman 
literature,  ii.  419. 

Namnetes,  the,  join  a maritime  confederacy 
against  Caesar,  i.  290. 

Narbo  Martius,  Roman  colony  at,  i.  33, 197. 
Devoted  to  the  interests  of  the  Roman 
aristocracy,  ii.  67. 

Narbonensis,  the  stronghold  of  the  Pom- 
peian faction,  ii.  67.  Augustus’s  organiza- 
tion of  the  provincia  Narbonensis,  iv.  73. 

Narcissus,  freedman  and  secretary  of  Clau- 
dius, v.  404.  His  wealth  proverbial,  405. 
Accomplishes  the  ruin  of  Appius  Silarius, 
408.  In  league  with  Messalina,  411.  Flat- 
tered by  Vitellius,  418.  Turns  agaiLst 
Messalina,  and  procures  her  destruction, 
429-436.  Recommends  Claudius  to  re- 
marry iElia  Petina,  437.  Decline  of  his 
power,  456.  Menaces  Agrippiua  and  Pal- 
las, 456.  His  reception  by  the  legionaries 
in  Gaul,  vi.  21.  Probably  the  Narcissus 
of  St.  Paul’s  Epistle,  xvi.  11,  211. 

Nasamones,  a Numidian  people,  revolt  and 
are  suppressed  by  the  praetor  Flaccus,  vii. 
94. 

Nasidius,  L.,  sent  by  Pompeius  to  relieve 
the  Massilians,  ii.  156, 157. 

Natural  philosophy,  acquaintance  of  the 
Romans  with,  vii.  227. 

Naulochus,  naval  victory  of  Agrippa  off,  iii. 
201,  246. 

Naumachia  of  Augustus  at  Rome,  iv.  385. 

Navigation  of  the  ancients,  and  the  rate  of 
travelling  by  sea,  iv.  312. 

Navy,  the,  of  Augustus,  iii.  416.  Mutiny 
of  Vitellius’s  fleet  at  Misenum,  vi.361. 

Neapolis,  description  of,  in  the  time  of  Au- 
gustus, iv.  363. 

Nemausus,  the  native  place  of  the  family 
of  Antoninas  Pius,  vii.  350  note  2.  Ha- 
drian erects  a basilica  at,  in  honour  of 
Plotina,  350. 

Nemi,  floating  palace  on  the  lake  of,  vii. 
272. 

Nera  Come,  town  of,  in  Arabia,  iv.  100. 

Neratius  Priscus,  desired  by  the  senate  as 
Trajan’s  successor,  vii.  328. 

Nero,  son  of  Germanicus,  affection  of  his 
cousin  Drusus  for  him,  v.  166.  Intro- 
duced by  Tiberius  to  the  senate,  177. 
Spies  set  by  Sojanus  to  watch  him,  203. 


Tiberius  complains  to  the  senate  of  him, 
214.  Banished  to  the  island  of  Pontia, 
216. 

Nero,  Drusus  Tiberius,  father  of  the  empe- 
ror Tiberius,  sides  with  L.  Antonius  in  the 
war  of  Perusia,  iii.  178. 

Nero  (Lucius  Domitius  Ahenobarbus), 
at  ten  years  of  age  appears  in  the 
“ Game  of  Troy,”  v.  422.  Betrothed 
to  Octavia,  daughter  of  Claudius  and  Mes- 
salina, 43S,  442.  Seneca,  the  philosopher, 
appointed  his  tutor,  442.  Introduced  to 
public  distinctions,  447.  Comes  forward 
as  the  advocate  of  popular  measures,  452. 
Married  to  Octavia,  452.  Saluted  emperor, 
459.  Family  character  of  his  ancestors, 
the  Domitii,  vi.  52.  His  parentage,  55. 
Misfortunes  of  his  early  years,  56.  Perils 
which  surrounded  him,  61.  Struggle  for 
influence  over  him : the  senate,  the  tutor, 
the  mother,  63.  Pronounces  the  funeral 
oration  over  Claudius,  65.  Favourable 
impression  made  by  his  first  speech  to  the 
senate,  66.  His  intrigue  with  the  freed- 
woman  Acte,  69.  His  gradual  progress  in 
vice,  70.  Seneca’s  praise  of  Nero’s  clem- 
ency, 71.  Alarm  and  menaces  of  Agrip- 
pina, 72.  Nero  causes  Britannicus  to  be 
poisoned,  75.  Seneca  aims  at  making  him 
popular  with  the  senate,  77.  Division 
between  Nero  and  his  mother,  78.  The 
charges  against  her  declared  unfounded, 
81.  His  dissolute  amusements,  82.  Con- 
secrates a temple  to  Claudius,  and  obtains 
a statue  for  his  father  Domitius,  S4.  .Fa- 
vourable characteristics  of  Nc-ro’s  early 
government,  84.  Liberality  of  his  finan- 
cial measures,  86.  Proposes  to  abolish 
the  vectigalia , S7.  Examination  of  what 
this  proposal  really  imports,  88.  Nero’s 
policy  gives  satisfaction  to  the  senate,  91. 
No  inquiry  made  into  the  irregularities 
of  his  private  life,  92.  The  “ Quinquen- 
nium Neronis,”  93.  Nero’s  passion  for 
Poppjea  Sabina,  97.  Murders  his  mother, 

103.  His  brutal  behaviour  to  her  corpse, 

104.  Attempts  to  justify  himself  to  the 
senate,  104.  His  triumphal  entry  into 
Rome,  106.  Gratifies  the  populace  with 
shows,  107.  Institutes  the  Juvenalia,  10S. 
Descends  upon  the  stage,  108.  Institutes 
the  Neronia,  109.  His  insensibility  to 
national  feeling;  causes  of  this,  112.  His 
temperate  proceedings  in  cases  of  majesty 
and  libel,  114.  Elevates  Fenius  Rufus 
and  Tigellinus,  118.  Puts  Rubellius  Plau- 
tus and  Cornelius  Sulla  to  death,  120,  121. 
Further  development  of  his  cruelty,  122. 
Repudiates  Octavia  and  marries  Popptea, 
122,  123.  His  prosecution  of  wealthy 
freedmen,  125.  Drives  his  chariot  in  the 
Circus  Maximus,  126.  His  presence  at 
Rome  desired  both  by  the  populace  and 
the  senate,  126.  Infamous  debauchery 
publicly  encouraged  by  him,  127.  The 
great  fire  of  Rome  imputed  by  the  popu- 
lace to  Nero  himself,  132.  Nero  the  first 
persecutor  of  the  Christians,  at  Rome,  134, 
216,  vii.  287.  The  rebuilding  of  the  city, 
vi.  137.  Extension  of  Nero’s  palace,  or 
golden  house,  13S.  His  exactions  and  con- 
fiscations requirod  to  defray  his  expense^ 


544 


INDEX. 


141.  Discontent  of  the  nobles  who  form 
a conspiracy,  and  place  Piso  at  their  head, 
145.  Plans  and  names  of  the  conspirators, 
145, 146.  Discovery  of  the  plot,  and  pun- 
i'hment  of  the  conspirators,  149,  150. 
Nero’s  performance  in  the  theatre,  155. 
Death  of  Poppaea,  156.  Her  eulogy  pro- 
nounced by  Nero,  156.  Who  proscribes 
C.  Cassius  and  L.  Silanus,  157.  Puts  Lu- 
cius Vetus  and  his  family  to  death,  158. 
Destroys  Paitus  Thrasea  and  Barea  Sora- 
nus,  165  et  seq.  General  religious  tolera- 
tion in  his  reign,  228.  His  government 
supported  by  the  voluptuousness  and 
cruelty  of  the  age,  225.  His  figure  and 
dress,  246.  His  vanity  and  love  of  admi- 
ration, 247.  V ulgar  ideas  of  magnificence ; 
wants  the  Imaginative  power  of  Caius 
C;esar,  248.  His  disregard  of  decorum, 
250.  His  superstition,  250.  His  favourites 
Helius,  Tigellinus,  Doryphorus,  and 
Sporus  despised  and  shunned  by  the 
upper  classes,  251.  His  impiety  in  bath- 
ing in  the  basin  of  the  Aqua  Marcia, 
250.  Ilis  cruelties  capricious,  not  politic, 
like  those  of  Tiberius,  252.  Ilis  proscrip- 
tions of  the  senate,  252.  Ilis  visit  to  the 
East  in  a.d.  66,  268.  Probable  object  of 
his  visit,  268.  His  progress  through 
Greece  described,  269.  His  triumphs  at 
the  Grecian  games,  269.  Proclaims  the 
freedom  of  Achaia,  270.  Projects  cutting 
through  the  isthmus  of  Corinth,  but  aban- 
dons the  design,  271.  Political  motive  of 
the  visit;  jealousy  of  Corbulo,  271.  Puts 
Corhulo  to  death,  272.  Shrinks  from  visit- 
ing Athens  and  from  initiation  into  the 
mysteries  of  Eleusis,  273.  Why  the  Ho- 
mans were  indignant  at  his  acting  and 
singing,  274.  Plunders  Greece  of  her 
monuments  of  art,  275.  Entrusts  Eome 
to  the  care  of  Helius  during  his  absence, 
276.  His  triumphal  entry  into  Rome,  277. 
Discontent  in  the  provinces,  279.  Vir- 
ginius,  Vindex,  and  Galba,  Macer,  and 
Fonteius  conspire  against  him,  279-282. 
His  vaccillating  humour  on  hearing  of  the 
conspiracy,  283.  His  last  hours  and  death, 
285-287.  Expectation  of  his  return  among 
both  Romans  and  Christians,  289,  290. 
Measures  for  the  punishment  of  his  fa- 
vourites, 302. 

Nero,  a pretending,  in  Domitian’s  reign, 
supported  by  the  Parthians,  vi.  290;  vii. 
110. 

Neronia,  games  instituted  by  Nero,  vi.  109. 

Nerva,  M.  Cocccius,  negotiates  terms  of  an 
arrangement  between  Octavius  and  An- 
toni us.  iii.  183. 

Nerva,  M.  Cocccius,  accompanies  Tiberius 
on  quitting  Rome,  v.  195.  His  reputation 
as  a lawyer,  241.  Vainly  dissuaded  from 
suicide  by  Tiberius,  242;  vii.  259. 

Nerva,  M.  Cocceius,  son  of  the  preceding, 
conducts  an  inquiry  into  the  conspiracy 
of  Piso,  vi.  151.  Rewarded  with  a triumph- 
al statue,  151. 

Nerva,  M.  Cocceius,  his  life  saved  by  a su- 
perstition of  Domitian,  vii.  152.  Elected 
emperor  by  the  senate,  158.  His  origin, 
life,  and  character,  159, 160.  Recalls  the 
exiles,  and  prosecutes  the  delators,  163. 


His  clemency,  164.  His  qualities  miscon- 
strued, 166.  His  moderation  mingled 
with  timidity,  165.  Conspiracy  of  Cal- 
purnius  Crassus,  vii.  167.  Mutiny  of  the 
praetorians,  167.  Nerva  gives  way  to  their 
demands,  but  immediately  adopts  Trajan 
for  his  partner,  168.  Ilis  death,  169.  His 
personal  appearance,  169.  His  wisdom  in 
adopting  ' Trajan,  171. 

Nervii,  a Belgic  tribe,  i.  225.  Join  a con- 
federacy against  the  Romans,  267.  Sui- 
prise  Ca?sar’s  camp,  274. 

Nica?a  besieged  by  the  Ligurians,  i.  195. 

Nicomedes,  king  of  Bithynia,  cedes  his  do- 
minions to  Rome,  iv.  105. 

Nicopolis,  the  Actian,  site  of,  iii.  248,  257. 

Nicopolis,  the  Egyptian,  founded,  iii.  281. 

Nigidius,  the  astrologer,  his  prophecy  re- 
specting Octavius,  iii.  60. 

Nigrinus,  put  to  death  by  the  senate  for 
conspiring  against  Hadrian,  vii.  335. 

Nile,  battle  of  the,  ii.  262,  263.  The  canal 
from  to  the  Red  Sea  repaired  by  Petro- 
nius,  iv.  101.  Exploration  of  the  country 
900  miles  above  Syene  in  the  time  of  Nero, 
vi.  268. 

Nisibis  taken  by  Trajan,  vii.  304. 

Nismes,  amphitheatre  at,  built,  vii.  404. 

Norbanus,  commands  a division  of  the 
triumvirs’  forces  in  Macedonia,  iii.  161. 

Noricans,  the,  defeated  by  P.  Silius,  iv.  160. 

Normandy,  tribes  of,  subdued  by  the  Ro- 
mans, i.  294. 

Noviodunum  (Nevers),  capital  of  the  Sues- 
siones,  besieged  and  taken  by  Ca*sar,  i.  270, 
271 ; ii.  16.  Destroyed  by  the  Gauls,  24. 

Novius,  the  quaestor,  his  punishment,  i.  144. 

Numidia  reduced  by  Caesar  to  the  form  of  a 
province,  ii.  304. 

Nymphea,  bath  houses  on  the  margin  of  the 
Alban  lake,  vii.  272. 

Nymphidius  Sabin  us,  prefect  of  the  praeto- 
rians, deserts  Nero,  vi.  285.  Offers  to  sup- 
port Galba,  293.  His  offer  rejected,  294. 
His  attempt  to  seize  the  empire,  294. 
Killed  by  the  prastorians,  295. 

OBELISK,  the  first,  introduced  into  Eu- 
rope, iv.  25. 

Obodes,  king  of  the  Nabathaean  Arabs,  iv. 
97, 114. 

Obultronius,  his  pretensions  to  the  empire, 
vi.  295. 

Octavia,  own  sister  of  Octavius,  and  wife  (1) 
of  Marcellus  and  (2)  of  M.  Antonius,  iii. 
183.  Her  virtues,  185.  Her  son,  M.  Mar- 
cellus, 188.  Winters  with  Antonius  at 
Athens  (a.tt.  715-716),  190.  Left  with  her 
brother  by  Antonius  as  a pledge  of  amity, 
198.  Brings  men  and  money  to  Antonius, 
but  is  commanded  to  remain  at  Athens, 
224.  Returns  to  Rome,  224.  H *r  recep- 
tion there,  224.  Takes  charge  of  her  own 
and  Fulvia’s  children  by  Antonius,  224. 
Divorced  by  Antonius,  241,  243.  Respect 
paid  by  Augustus  to  her,  iv.  92.  Her 
son  Marcellus  married  to  Julia,  her  young- 
er daughter  Marcella  to  Agrippa,  127. 
Regard  entertained  by  the  Romans  for 
her,  128.  Virgil’s  lines  on  the  death  of 
her  son  Marcellus  recited  to  her,  133.  Her 
death,  182.  Extraordinary  honours  paid 


INDEX. 


5 45 


to  tier  memory,  183.  Her  elder  daughter 
Marcella  married  to  Julius  Antonius,  iii. 
271  note  i ; iv.  13G.  183  note  l. 

Octavia,  daughter  of  Claudius  and  Messali- 
na,  prevented  from  seeing  her  father,  v. 
433.  Betrothed  to  Nero,  438,  442.  Mar- 
ried to  him,  452.  Her  fall,  banishment 
and  death,  vi.  116-124. 

Octavius,  C.  See  Augustus. 

Octavius,  serves  under  Crassus  in  the  war 
against  the  Parthians,  i.  426.  Commands 
a Pompeian  fleet,  ii.  250.  Cuts  off  Gabi- 
nius’s  supplies,  266.  Compelled  to  sail 
for  Africa,  266. 

Octodurus,  capital  of  the  Yeragri,  i.  287. 
Occupied  by  S.  Galba,  2S7. 

CEaomaus,  one  of  the  leaders  of  the  revolted 
gladiators,  i.  51  note. 

Oligarchy  of  Rome.  See  Patricians. 

Olympieum,  the,  at  Athens,  completed  by 
Hadrian,  vii.  357. 

Ombi  and  Tentyra,  the  bloody  quarrel  of, 
vii.  375. 

Opimius,  the  consul,  defeats  the  Ligurians, 

i.  195. 

Oppius,  C.,  a friend  of  Csesar’s,  his  character, 

ii.  349,  350. 

Oratory,  character  of  Roman,  ii.  422. 

Orbis  pictus,  or  map  of  the  world,  of  Agrip- 
pa,  iii.  422 ; iv.  323. 

Ore  ini,  or  CharonitiE,  origin  of  the  name, 

iii.  52. 

Orestilla,  wife  of  Cn.  Piso,  divorced,  es- 
poused, and  repudiated  by  Caius  Csesar, 

v.  307. 

Orgetorix,  a chieftain  of  the  Helvetii,  his 
ambition,  i.  238.  His  intrigues  and  sud- 
den death,  239,  240. 

Orodes,  king  of  Parthia,  complains  of  the 
invasion  of  Crassus,  i.  416.  Attacks  Arta- 
bazes,  king  of  Armenia,  422.  The  head 
and  hand  of  Crassus  sent  to  him  by  his 
general  Surenas,  423.  Comes  to  terms 
v ith  Artabazes,  429.  Throws  the  Roman 
ambassador  Hirrus  into  chains,  ii.  242. 
Invades  Syria,  iii.  191.  Abdicates  and  is 
murdered  by  his  son  Phraates,  220. 

Osismii,  the,  compelled  to  submit  to  the 
Romans,  i.  281.  Join  a maritime  confed- 
eracy against  the  Romans,  290. 

Ostia,  harbour  of,  insulted  by  the  Cilician 
pirates,  i.  47  note.  The  new  haven  of 
Claudius,  v.  39 L 

Ostorius  Scapula,  his  campaigns  in  Britain, 

vi.  28,  et  seq.  Founds  the  colony  of  Camu- 
lodunum,  30.  Defeats  Caractacus,  35. 
His  death,  38.  His  son  destroyed  by 
Nero,  161. 

Otho,  Salvius,  companion  of  Nero’s  youth, 
vi.  69.  Husband  of  Poppjea,  97.  Governs 
Lusitania  ten  years,  97,  303.  Declares  for 
Galba,  282.  Mortified  by  Galba’s  adopt- 
ing Piso,  he  aspires  to  the  empire,  303. 
Tampers  with  the  soldiers,  304.  Goes  to 
the  praetorian  camp,  306.  Proclaimed 
emperor  by  the  guards,  and  leads  them  to 
the  Forum,  309,  310.  Galba  assassinated, 
311.  Otho  hailed  as  Olho-Nero  by  the 
populace,  315.  Threatened  with  a rival  in 
Vitellius,  315.  Vitellius  marches  south- 
ward to  contest  the  empire,  321,  et  seq. 
Otho  offers  terms,  but  j repares  for  war, 


824.  His  government  conciliatory  to  the 
senate  and  the  provinces,  326.  The  senate 
suspected  of  treachery  to  him,  327.  He 
meets  danger  manfully  and  ably,  328. 
Distrusts  his  officers,  329.  Throws  off 
his  dissolute  habits  and  marches  at  tho 
head  of  his  troops,  330.  Operations  of 
his  fleet  on  the  Ligurian  coast,  331.  At 
Placentia  and  Bedriacum,  332.  Defeated 
at  Bedriacum,  835.  Declines  to  renew 
the  contest,  and  stabs  himself,  336,  337. 
Motives  for  his  suicide,  337. 

Ovid,  banishment  of,  iv.  257.  Speculations 
on  its  cause,  258-260.  Character  of  his 
poetry,  258.  An  imitator  of  Parthenius, 
462.  Survey  of  his  poems,  462—465.  Suf- 
fered to  languish  in  exile  by  Tiberius,  v. 
29.  His  death,  iv.  465.  Compared  with 
Statius,  vii  232. 

Oxybii,  a Ligurian  tribe,  marked  out  for 
Roman  vengeance,  i.  195. 

pACONITTS  AGRIPPINTTS  charged  by 

JL  Nero  with  dereliction  of  his  senatorial 
duties,  vi.  171.  His  punishment,  172. 

Pacorus  I.,  king  of  Parthia,  marries  a daugh- 
ter of  Artabazes,  i.  429.  Defeated  by  Cas- 
sius, ii.  56.  Invades  Syria,  iii.  191.  Slain, 
192. 

Pacorus  IL,  king  of  Parthia,  his  interference 
with  Armenia,  vii.  297.  Forms  relations 
with  Decebalus,  297.  His  death,  298. 

Piemani,  a Belgic  tribe,  i.  225.  Join  the 
confederacy  formed  against  the  Romans, 
267. 

Pamius  Postumus,  commander  of  the  2nd 
legion  in  Britain,  his  cowardice,  vi.  46. 
Commits  suicide,  49. 

Paelus,  Cesennius,  entrusted  with  the  com- 
mand in  Cappadocia  and  Galatia,  vi.  267. 
Two  of  his  three  legions  taken  by  Yolo- 
gesces,  king  of  Parthia,  267.  Recalled  by 
the  emperor,  267. 

Pastus  Thrasea.  See  Thrasea. 

Palaces  of  the  emperors,  their  vast  extent 

vii.  267.  The  Golden  House  of  Nero,  vi. 
138;  vii.  33,  267.  The  floating  palaoe  od 
the  lake  of  Nemi,  272. 

Palatine  Hill,  regarded  by  the  Romans  a? 
the  cradle  of  the  city,  i.  17.  Contrast  be- 
tween it  and  the  Aventine  as  sites  for  a 
city,  18.  Demolition  of  Cicero’s  house  on 
the,  302.  Temple  of  Apollo  built  by 
Augustus  on  the,  iv.  25.  Description  of 
it,  in  the  time  of  Augustus,  370. 

Palestine,  kingdom  of,  conferred  upon  Her- 
od, iii.  190.  Impoverished  by  its  conquer- 
ors, 289.  Peculiarity  of  its  geographical 
position,  289.  Its  liability  to  invasion, 
from  its  configuration,  2S9.  Progress  ana 
extent  of  the  Hellenic  element  among  it) 
population,  292.  Antagonism  of  the  Phar  • 
isees  and  Sadducees,  295,  296.  The  Phari- 
sees the  popular  party,  297.  Division  of 
Palestine  between  the  sons  of  Herod  the 
Great,  v.  269.  Revolt  of  the  Jews  in 
Palestine  in  the  reign  of  Trajan,  vii.  307- 
314.  Palestine  placed  under  the  control 
of  Martius  Turbo,  331. 

Palfurius  Sura,  struck  by  Yespasian  from 
the  senatorian  roll,  and  turns  Stoic  and 
sycophant  under  Domitiun,  vii.  130. 


546 


INDEX. 


Fallns,  freedman  of  Claudius,  v.  404.  His 
wealth,  405.  Extravagantly  flattered  by 
L.  Vitellius,  417.  Takes  part  against 
Messalina.  429.  Supports  Agrippina,  437. 
Becomes  the  paramour  of  Agrippina,  443. 
His  pretended  vigour  and  its  reward,  450. 
Protects  his  brother  Eelix  against  the 
Jews,  450.  His  intrigue  with  Agrippina, 
455;  vi.  64.  Becomes  obnoxious  to  Nero, 
vi.  64.  And  is  disgraced,  72.  Acquitted, 
81.  Put  to  death  by  Nero,  125. 

Palma,  Cornelius,  governor  of  Syria,  his 
conquests  in  Arabia,  vii.  200.  Sentenced 
to  death  by  the  senate  for  intriguing 
against  Hadrian,  335. 

Fandateria,  Julia  banished  by  Augustus  to, 
iv.  211. 

Pandion,  an  Indian  king,  sends  an  embassy 
to  Augustus,  iv.  118. 

Pannonians,  the,  defeated  by  Octavius,  iii. 
233.  By  P.  Silius,  iv.  1G0.  And  by  Agrip- 
pa,  166.  Resume  arms,  170.  Tiberius 
6ent  against  them,  170.  Subjugated  by 
Tiberius,  187.  Fresh  revolt  of,  in  a.d.  6, 
245,246.  Defeated  by  Cascina.  247.  Final- 
ly subjugated  by  Tiberius,  254.  Discon- 
tent of  the  legions  in  Pannonia,  v.  18. 
Drusus  sent  to  quell  the  mutiny,  19. 
Number  of  legions  stationed  in  Pannonia 
in  the  time  of  Tiberius,  142. 

Pansa,  Vibius,  a friend  of  Caesar,  his  Epi- 
curean tenets,  ii.  352.  Designated  consul 
for  a.u.  711,  365;  iii.  82.  His  indolence, 
105.  Joins  his  colleague  Hirtius  in  the 
Cisalpine,  113.  Unites  with  Hirtius  and 
Octavius  to  relieve  Decimus  in  Mutina, 
115.  Mortally  wounded  at  Forum  Gal- 
lorum,  169.  His  death  at  Bononia,  125. 

Pantheon,  building  of  the,  iii.  339.  Restored 
by  Domitian,  vii.  118. 

Pantomimes  of  the  Romans,  iv.  411. 

Paper  imported  into  Rome  from  Egypt,  iv. 
315.  Manufacture  of,  at  Rome,  316. 

Papirius,  a knight,  killed  by  Clodius,  i. 
321. 

Papius,  the  tribune,  his  law  de  peregrinis , 
i.  105. 

Panetonium  shuts  its  gates  against  Anto- 
nins, iii.  260. 

Parental  authority  among  the  Romans,  ii. 
410. 

Paris,  the  mime,  put  to  death  by  Domitian 
for  his  intrigue  with  Domitia,  vii.  110. 

Parks  and  gardens  of  the  Romans,  iv.  409. 

Parthamasiris,  son  of  Pacorus,  king  of  Par- 
thia,  proposed  by  Chosroes  as  a candidate 
for  the  Armenian  crown,  vii.  298.  Lays 
his  diadem  at  Trajan’s  feet ; his  dignified 
conduct  in  return  for  indignities  offered 
him,  and  treacherous  slaughter,  vii.  301- 
303. 

Parthamaspates,  placed  by  Trajan  on  the 
throne  of  Parthia,  vii.  307.  Crowned  by 
Trajan  at  Ctesiphon,  307. 

Parthia,  rise  of  the  monarchy  of,  i.  407.  Ar- 
saces,  408.  The  Parthian  court  at  Seleu- 
cia,  409.  Parthian  soldiers  and  their 
equipment,  409  note 3.  Tne  dynasty  of 
the  Arsaoidte  obnoxious  to  its  Persian  sub- 
jects, 410.  Invasion  of  Parthia  by  Cras- 
sus,  414.  Preparations  of  the  Parthians, 
420.  Their  stratagem  to  mislead  the  ene- 


my, 420,  421.  Their  general  Surenas,  421 
Engage  the  Romans,  424.  Compel  th* 
Romans  to  retreat,  425.  Entice  Crassua 
and  his  staff  into  a conference,  and  mur- 
der them,  427.  Amuse  their  subjects  with 
the  spectacle  of  a mock  triumph,  42S. 
Threaten  an  irruption  into  Roman  terri- 
tory, ii.  55.  Cicero  marches  against  them, 
56.  Their  aggressions  checked  by  Cas- 
sius, 56.  Declaration  of  the  Sibylline  ora- 
cles that  Parthia  can  only  be  conquered 
by  a king,  467.  Expedition  of  Ventidiua 
in  Parthia,  iii.  190, 192.  Adventures  of  Q. 
Labienus  in  Parthia,  190.  Preparations  of 
Antonius  for  war  with  Orodes,  190.  In- 
vasion of  the  Parthians  in  Syria,  192.  De- 
feated with  the  loss  of  their  generals,  192. 
First  campaign  of  Antonius  against  them, 
221.  His  disastrous  retreat,  222.  The  al- 
liance of  the  king  of  Parthia  courted  by 
Antonius,  237.  Parthian  affairs  settled  by 
Octavius,  281 ; iv.  115.  Condition  of  Par- 
thia at  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of  Au- 
gustus, 115.  Who  compels  the  restora- 
tion of  the  standards  of  Crassus,  116.  Po- 
litical characteristics  of  the  Parthians, 
295.  State  of  Parthia  in  a.d.  17,  v.  51. 
Interference  of  Parthia  with  Armenia,  vii. 
297.  This  interference  resisted  by  Tra- 
jan, 298.  Internal  dissensions  in  Parthia, 
which  is  invaded  by  Trajan,  305.  The 
Parthians  subdued  by  Trajan,  306.  Who 
consents  to  restore  the  kingdom  to  a nom- 
inal sovereignty,  307.  Visited  by  Hadrian, 
who  arranges  terms  of  peace  and  mutual 
forbearance,  352.  Victories  of  Avidius 
Cassius  over  the  Parthians,  455. 

Parthian  games  instituted  in  honour  of  Tra 
jan,  vii.  331. 

Passienus,  his  remark  on  Caligula,  v.  252. 

Parthenius  of  Nicaea,  brought  captive  to 
Rome  during  the  Mithridatic  War,  iv  462. 
Gallas  and  Virgil  among  his  disciples: 
imitated  by  Ovid  and  admired  by  Tibe- 
rius, 462. 

Paternus,  lieutenant  of  M.  Aurelius,  his  vic- 
tory over  the  barbarians,  vii.  474. 

Patiscus,  joins  the  conspiiators  after  Caesar’s 
murder,  iii.  12. 

Patria  carere , what  the  Romans  meant  by, 
v.  196. 

Patricians  and  plebeians,  struggle  between 
the,  i.  22.  The  contest  transferred  to  the 
richer  and  poorer  classes,  24.  The  Lici- 
nian  rogations  and  the  agrarian  laws  of  the 
Gracchi,  26.  Triumph  of  the  popular 
party,  29.  Reaction  in  favour  of  the  oli- 
garchy under  Sulla,  31.  Corruption  of  the 
provincial  governors,  35.  Moral  superior- 
ity of  the  knights  to  the  senators,  54. 
Position  and  policy  of  the  senatorial 
party  upon  the  death  of  Sulla,  59.  Com- 
position of  the  oligarchy,  61.  Origin  of 
the  patricians,  and  their  division  into  fam- 
ilies, 61.  Nature  of  the  education  of  the 
Roman  nobles,  61  note.  In  what  nobility 
properly  consisted,  62.  The  number  of 
the  senate  fixed  by  Sulla  at  600,  62.  The 
great  offices  of  state  shared  by  only  a lew 
houses,  63,  64.  Character  of  the  principal 
oligarchical  leaders,  64.  Character  of  the 
nobles  as  a class,  81.  Their  ostentation 


INDEX. 


547 


eoupled  with  want  of  refinement,  83. 
Ferocity  of  the  younger  nobility,  85.  The 
command  of  the  national  armies  retained 
by  the  nobles,  86.  Growth  of  the  strength 
Of  the  popular  party,  and  fears  and  dan- 
gers of  the  patricians,  87,  SS.  Indignation 
of  the  nobles  at  the  restoration  of  the 
trophies  of  Marius,  104.  Their  retalia- 
tion, 105.  Weapons  of  the  popular  party 
In  Caesar’s  hands,  106, 109, 112.  Destruc- 
tion of  the  civil  influence  of  the  nobles 
113.  Who  seek  to  implicate  Ccesar  and 
Crassus  in  a charge  of  conspiracy,  119. 
Failure  of  the  attempt,  120.  Violence  of 
the  nobles  and  discontent  of  the  people, 
124.  Their  extravagance  and  profuseness, 
127.  Their  preparations  against  the  de- 
signs imputed  to  Pompeiue,  140.  Har- 
assed by  Ca-sar  and  Metellus  Nepos,  141. 
Triumph  of  the  nobles  in  the  Forum,  143. 
Oiesar  insulted  by  the  nobles,  who  are 
compelled  to  make  reparation,  143.  At- 
tempts of  the  patricians  to  turn  the  pro- 
fanity of  Clodius  to  political  account,  147, 
148.  Failure  of  their  proceedings  against 
Olodius,  151.  Their  violent  contest  with 
Casar,  172.  Ciusar’s  agrarian  bill  forced 
upon  them,  173.  Their  ingratitude  to  the 
Allobroges,  210.  Competition  of  the  nobles 
in  the  commission  for  the  settlement  of 
Egyptian  affairs,  32S.  The  nobles  aban- 
doned by  Cicero,  335.  Their  power  as  a 
class  overawed  by  the  enormous  resources 
of  individuals  in  the  state,  359.  Their 
selfishness  and  blindness  in  the  crisis  of 
their  fate,  434.  The  alliance  of  the  oli- 
garchy courted  by  the  consul  Cn.  Pom- 
peius,  ii.  46.  Dissatisfaction  of  the  nobles 
at  the  inaction  of  Pompeius,  78.  Prepare 
to  oppose  Ciesar's  measures  by  force,  83. 
Their  forces,  S3-S5.  Assign  the  provinces 
to  the  leaders  of  the  senate,  86.  Their  in- 
dignation at  the  abandonment  of  Italy  by 
Pompeius,  111.  Their  muster  in  Pom- 
peius’s  camp,  190.  Their  arrogance,  in- 
trigue, and  mutual  jealousies,  225,  226. 
Their  dissatisfaction  with  Cicero,  226. 
Make  their  submission  to  Caesar,  277. 
Their  adulation  of  him,  343.  Decision  of 
the  senate  respecting  his  murderers,  iii. 
£7.  The  nobles  reassured  by  the  modera- 
tion of  Antonius,  44.  Conservation  of  the 
patrician  caste,  iv.  19.  The  principle  of 
adoption,  20.  Increase  of  the  patrician 
houses  at  the  commencement  of  the  em- 
ire,  21.  Religious  functions  of  patrician 
ouses,  22.  The  mansions  of  the  nobles 
in  Rome  described,  392.  Sketch  of  a Ro- 
man noble's  mode  of  passing  a day,  420. 
His  business  in  the  morning.  421.  His 
midday  siesta,  422.  His  afternoon : the 
field  of  Mars,  422.  His  evening:  the  sup- 
per, 423.  Horace  employed  by  Augustus 
to  lecommend  moderation  and  content- 
ment to  the  restless  nobles,  456.  Their 
licentiousness  as  a class,  v.  233.  Spite  of 
the  emperor  Caius  against  their  insignia, 
837.  His  bantering  humour  and  system- 
atic persecution  of  them,  340.  State  of 
the  patrician  education  in  the  2nd  century 
of  the  Christian  era,  vi.  56.  V icio  is  moral 
training  of  the  young  nobles,  CL  Grow- 


ing discontent  of  the  class  in  the  lattei 
part  of  the  reign  of  Nero,  144.  Impover- 
ishment of  the  old  families  at  the  time  of 
the  Claudian  Ciesars,  254.  But  general 
wealth  of  the  upper  classes,  254.  Trajan’s 
measures  for  maintaining  the  dignity  of 
the  senate,  vii.  212.  Examples  of  the 
habits  of  the  more  refined  and  intelligent 
among  the  nobles,  262.  Magnificence  of 
their  dwellings,  267.  Review  of  the  posi- 
tion of  the  nobles  in  the  age  of  the  Fla- 
vians, 431,  et  seq. 

Pauj  St.,  special  applicability  of  his  teach- 
ing to  the  Jews  and  proselytes  at  Rome, 
yi.  210.  His  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  ana 
tradition  of  his  intercourse  with  Burrhus 
or  Seneca,  212,  213.  His  imprisonment  at 
Rome,  213.  Set  at  liberty,  216.  Story  of 
his  return  to,  and  decapitation  at,  Rome, 
223. 

Paullinus,  Suetonius,  his  conquests  in  Brit- 
ain, vi.  42,  et  seq . Removed  from  his 
command,  50. 

Paulus,  Julius,  put  to  death  for  insubordi- 
nation, vi.  3S6. 

Paulus,  L.  Aimilius,  elected  consul,  ii.  58. 
Proscribed  by  the  triumvirs,  iii.  140. 

Paulus,  L.  Ahnilius,  grand-nephew  of  Lepi- 
dus,  marries  Julia  granddaughter  of  Au- 
gustus, iv.  256.  Banishment  of  his  wife, 
257. 

Pax  Romana,  or  idea  of  universal  peace,  iv. 
344.  Troops  and  fortifications  by  which 
this  peace  was  secured,  344.  War  of 
opinion  silently  generated  beneath  the 
surface  of  the  Roman  peace,  347. 

Pearls  of  the  coast  of  Britain,  i.  383. 

Pedius,  Q.,  a triumph  granted  to,  ii.  357. 
Elected  consul  with  Octavius,  iii  132. 
Notice  of  him,  132.  Proposes  a bill  for 
the  condemnation  of  Ca-sar’s  murderers, 
133.  Proposes  the  restoration  to  favour 
of  Antonius  and  Lepidus,  134.  Allays  the 
fears  of  the  citizens,  141.  Dies  suddenly, 
142. 

Pedo  Albinovanus,  his  poem  on  Drusus’s 
expedition  into  Germany,  iv.  180  note  >. 

Pelo,  consul,  lost  in  the  earthquake  at  An- 
tioch, vii.  299. 

Pegasus,  prefect  of  the  city  under  Domitian, 
vii.  140. 

Pella,  L..  his  profligate  corruption,  iii.  165. 

Pelusium  taken  by  Mithri dates,  king  of 
Pontus,  ii.  262. 

Perasa  reduced  by  Vespasian,  vi.  437,  438. 

Pergamus,  exactions  of  Antonius  in,  iii.  173, 
174. 

Periplus  of  the  Euxine  and  Erythraean  seas, 
ascribed  to  Arian,  vii.  402. 

Perperna,  compelled  by  his  soldiers  to  take 
them  over  to  Sertorius,  i.  39.  Assassi- 
nates Sertorius,  and  takes  command  of 
the  revolted  Iberians,  42.  Defeated  by 
Cu.  Pompeius.  and  put  to  death,  42. 

Persia,  reign  of  the  Arsacidne  in,  i.  410. 

Persius,  A ulus,  pupil  of  the  stoic  Cornntus, 
his  life  and  writings,  vi  233,  234.  Com- 
pared with  Juvenal,  233. 

Perusia,  L.  Antonius  besieged  by  Octavius 
in,  iii.  180.  Famine  in,  180.  Capitulates, 
180.  Destroyed  by  fire,  180. 

Pestilence  spread  by  an  army  on  its  way 


548 


INDEX. 


from  the  East,  vii.  461.  Its  disastrous 
effects  on  the  empire,  486. 

Petra,  Pompeius  blockaded  within  his  line?, 
by  Caesar  at,  ii.  206.  Operations  before, 
218. 

Petra,  the  rock-hewn  city,  chief  emporium 
of  the  ^astern  trade  with  Rome,  iv.  95. 
Acquired  by  the  Romans,  vii.  201. 

Petrcius,  M.,  defeats  and  destroys  Catilina 
and  his  army,  i.  132.  Opposes  the  arrest 
of  M.  Cato,  172.  Legatus  of  Pompeius  in 
Spain,  ii.  1.8,0.  His  campaign  and  fero- 
city, 132-154.  Joins  the  defeated  Pom- 
peians at  Patr®,  283.  Defeats  Cassar  in 
Numidia,  291.  Slain  by  Juba,  302. 

Petronius  Arbiter,  authorship  of  the  w Sati- 
ricon  ” of,  vi.  164. 

Petronius,  C.,  prefect  of  Egypt,  his  improve- 
ments in  the  province,  iv.  102.  Which  he 
defends  from  an  attack  of  the  Ethiopians, 
102. 

Petronius,  C.,  governor  of  Bithynia,  pro- 
scribed, vi.  162.  His  character  and  death, 
163. 

Petronius,  Roman  governor  of  Judea,  order- 
ed to  put  up  a statue  of  Caius  in  the  tem- 
ple of  Jerusalem,  v.  316,319. 

Petronius  Turpilianus,  his  prefecture  in 
Britain,  vii.  69. 

Plnedrus,  the  fabulist,  supposed  to  have 
been  a freedman  of  Tiberius,  v.  262. 
His  writings  unnoticed  for  four  centuries, 
262. 

Phagita,  Cornelius,  seizes  Cresar.  i.  94  note  2. 

Phaon,  freedman  of  Nero,  vi  286. 

Pharasmanes,  king  of  the  Alani,  Hadrian’s 
treatment  of,  vii.  380. 

Pharisees,  their  tenacity  of  the  Law  and  na- 
tional ideas,  iii.  295.  Their  antagonism  with 
the  Sadducees,  295.  But  the  Sadducees 
the  popular  party  in  Palestine,  297. 

Phurnaces  of  Pontus,  revolts  against  his 
father  Mithridates,  i.  138.  His  treason 
rewarded  with  the  kingdom  of  the  Bos- 
porus, 138.  Attempts  to’  recover  his 
father’s  empire,  ii.  264.  Defeats  Caesar’s 
lieutenant  Cal  vinus,  265.  But  defeated  by 
Caesar  at  Zela,  272.  His  death,  272. 

Phiros,  the  island  of,  the  key  of  Egypt 
b v sea,  ii.  259.  Occupied  by  Ciesar,  259, 
262. 

Pharsalia,  position  of  the  armies  of  Caesar 
and  Pompeius  in  the  plain  of,  ii.  227.  De- 
feat of  Pompeius  at,  236.  “ Pharsalia,” 

the,  of  Lucan,  vi.  243 ; vii.  223. 

Philadelphus,  king  of  Paphlagonia,  an  An- 
tonian, goes  over  to  the  Octavians,  iii. 
249. 

Philagrus,  the  sophist,  professor  at  Athens, 
vii.  361. 

Philippic  orations,  the,  of  Cicero,  analyzed, 
iii.  86-119. 

Philippi,  battle  of,  iii.  162-169. 

Philippus,  Marcius,  his  fish-ponds,  i.  84. 
Elected  consul,  331.  Goes  into  mourning 
and  refuses  to  perform  his  dut.es,  839. 
Husband  of  Alia,  and  step-father  of  Octa- 
vius. ii.  367 ; iii.  57,  58.  Sent  by  the  se- 
nate to  treat  with  Antonius.  106. 

Philippus,  son  of  Herod  the  Great,  married 
to  his  niece  Herodias,  v.  277.  Repudiated 
by  his  wife,  277. 


Philo  Jud.Tus,  his  mission  to  Caius  Ccesar, 
v.  316.  His  account  of  the  interview  with 
the  emperor  in  the  gardens  of  Maecenas, 
318,819. 

Philogonus,  betrays  Cicero  to  his  assassins, 
iii.  147. 

Philopator,  king  of  Cilicia,  dethroned  by 
Augustus,  iv.  109. 

Philosophy  and  philosophers;  alliance  of 
philosophers  at  Rome,  with  religion  and 
government,  vi.  188.  Attitude  of  opposi- 
tion to  government  first  assumed  by  tha 
Stoics  under  the  empire,  189.  Seneca’s 
political  and  moral  teaching,  231.  The 
philosophy  of  the  Stoics,  233.  No  politi- 
cal philosophy  in  the  writings  of  Persius, 
234.  Lucan’s  “ Pharsalia,”  235.  His  views 
of  philosophy,  240.  Measures  of  Vespa- 
sian against  the  philosophers,  vii.  30. 
Ilclvidius  Priscus  the  only  martyr  to 
philosophy,  31.  Domitian’s  edicts  against 
the  philosophers,  111,  148.  Mutual  ap- 
proximation of  the  sects  of  philosophy  in 
the  time  of  Trajan,  254.  The  Stoics  and 
Epicureans,  254.  Character  of  the  profes- 
sorial system  established  at  the  Univer- 
sity of  Athens,  360-362. 

Philostratus,  his  life  of  Apollonius  unworthy 
of  credit,  vii.  365. 

Phoenicia,  its  submission  to  Pompeius,  i. 
138. 

Phraates,  becomes  king  of  Parthia,  iii.  220. 
Overthrown  by  Tiridates,  and  has  an  asy- 
lum granted  him  by  Octavius,  281. 

Phyllis,  Domitian's  nurse,  her  fidelity  to  his 
remains,  vii.  162. 

Pialia,  establishment  of  the  festival  of  the, 
vii.  397,  note  >. 

Pictones,  a Gallic  tribe,  i.  215.  Revolt  of 
the,  put  down,  ii.  37. 

Pilatus,  Pontius,  procurator  of  Judaea,  his 
government,  recall,  and  banishment,  v. 
270, 271. 

Pinarius  refuses  to  admit  Antonius  into 
Paraetonium,  iii.  260.  Hands  over  his 
command  to  Cornelius  Gallus,  263. 

Pincian  Hill,  the,  described,  iv.  387. 

Pindarus,  freedman  of  Cassius,  whom  he 
kills,  iii.  167. 

Pinnes,  the  Illyrian  chief,  his  revolt,  iv. 
247.  Betrayed  to  the  Romans,  255. 

Pirates,  Cilician,  origin  of  the,  i.  45.  Causes 
of  their  prosperity,  46.  Reduced  by  Pom- 
peius, 48. 

Pirustae,  the,  of  the  Tyrol,  i.  384. 

Pisidia,  given  by  Antonius  to  Amyntas,  iii. 
190. 

Piso,  C.  Calpurnius,  charges  preferred 
against  him  by  Caesar,  i.  112.  Implicated 
in  the  conspiracy  of  Catilina,  114.  His 
death,  115. 

Piso,  L.  Calpurnius,  his  daughter  married 
to  Caesar,  i.  177.  Elected  consul,  177.  His 
treatment  of  Cicero,  183.  Clodius  assigns 
him  the  provinces  of  Macedonia  and 
Achaia,  305.  Takes  part  with  Clodius 
against  Pompeius,  321.  His  recall  obtain- 
ed by  Cicero,  337.  Demands  a public 
funeral  for  Ca?sar,  iii.  28.  Chief  mourner, 
37.  His  furious  invective  against  Anto- 
nius in  the  senate,  82.  Sent  by  the  senate 
to  treat  with  Antonius,  104. 


INDEX. 


549 


Piso,  Cn.  Calpumius,  appointed  by  Tibe- 
rius governor  of  Syria,  v.  61.  His  pride, 
insolence  to  Germanicus,  and  corruption 
of  the  soldiers,  61,  62.  Undertakes  the 
cause  of  the  Parthian  prince  Vonones,  64. 
Overrides  the  regulations  of  Germanicus, 
and  prepares  to  quit  his  province,  66. 
Suspected  of  having  poisoned  Germani- 
cus, 69.  His  indecent  exultation  at  the 
death  of  Germanicus,  TO.  Claims  the 
government  of  Syria,  71.  His  violent 
measures,  71.  Compelled  by  the  friends 
Germanicus  to  return  to  Pome,  72. 
At  peals  to  Tiberius,  77.  His  deliberate 
journey  to  Italy,  78.  His  trial  and  de- 
fence, 79,  80.  Deserted  by  his  wife  Plan- 
cina,  he  commits  suicide,  84.  Humour 
that  he  was  put  to  death  by  Tiberius  un- 
fairly countenanced  by  Tacitus,  85.  The 
sentence  of  the  senate  upon  him  mitigated 
by  Tiberius,  86.  Execution  of  his  wife, 

244. 

Piso,  Cn.  Calpurnius,  his  wife  Orestilla 
taken  from  him  b}^  the  emperor  Caius,  v. 
807.  Restored  to  favour  by  Claudius,  and 
raised  to  tbe  consulship,  vi.  145.  Heads  a 
conspiracy  against  Nero,  145. 

Piso  Galerianus,  son  of  the  last,  put  to  death 
by  Mucianus,  vi.  376. 

Piso  Licinianus,  chosen  by  Galba  as  his  col- 
league in  the  empire,  vi.  29S.  Presented 
by  Galba  to  the  soldiers,  301.  The  adop- 
tion accepted  with  satisfaction  by  the 
senate,  301.  Murdered  by  Otho,  311. 

Piso,  L .,  cousin  of  the  last,  put  to  death,  vi. 
377. 

Piso,  L.,  extinguishes  an  insurrection  in 
Thrace  and  Massia,  iv.  1S8.  Defends  Cn. 
Piso  charged  with  murder,  v.  80.  Prefect 
of  the  city  and  chief  pontiff,  his  character, 

245. 

Piso,  Pupius,  consul,  his  behaviour  in  the 
affair  of  Clodius,  i.  148. 

Placentia,  destroyed  by  the  Gauls  under 
Hamilcar,  i.  192.  Held  for  Otho,  vi.  332. 
Unsuccessfully  attacked  by  the  Vitellians, 
332. 

Placidius,  lieutenant  of  Yespasian,  repulsed 
at  Jotapata,  vi.  434. 

Planasia,  Agrippa  Postumus  banished  to,  iv. 
253. 

Plancina,  daughter  of  Munatius  Plancus, 
wife  of  Cn.  Piso,  v.  61.  Her  friendship 
with  Li  via  Augusta,  61.  The  rival  of 
Agrippina,  61.  Her  arrogant  conduct  in 
Syria.  62.  Included  in  the  accusation  of 
her  husband  of  having  poisoned  German- 
icus, 69.  Separates  her  cause  from  his, 
84.  Protected  by  Livia,  86.  But  at  last 
condemned  by  Tiberius.  244. 

Plancus,  Munatius,  brought  to  the  bar  of 
justice,  ii.  44.  Nominated  consul  by  Cfe- 
ear,  365.  Commands  in  Further  Gaul,  iii. 
98,  105,  109.  Crosses  the  Rhone,  but 
shrinks  from  attacking  Antonius,  126. 
Joined  by  Decimus  Brutus,  127.  Ap- 
pointed consul,  triumphs,  and  demands 
the  proscription  of  his  brother,  157.  Fails 
to  relieve  L.  Antonius  in  Perusia,  179. 
Flees  with  Fulvia  to  Athens,  181.  In 
Syria,  205.  Death  of  Sextus  Pompeius 
ascribed  to  him,  205.  His  buffooneries  in 


Alexandria,  228.  Deserts  Antonins,  and 
divulges  his  will,  241.  Founds  Lugdu- 
num,  iv.  75. 

Plautia  Urgulanilla,  married  to  Claudius,  v. 
399.  Repudiated  for  adultery,  399. 

Plautius  Rufus,  his  seditious  placards  posted 
about  Rome,  iv.  250. 

Plautius  Sylvanus,  Tiberius’s  treatment  ot, 
v.  1S4 

Plebeians  and  patricians,  struggle  between 
the,  i.  21.  Triumph  of  the  popular  party, 
28.  Reaction  in  favour  of  the  oligarchy 
under  Sulla,  31,  59. 

Plennius,  takes  command  of  the  remnant  of 
the  Pompeians  in  Lilybamm.  iii.  202. 
Gains  over  Lepidus  and  his  legions,  202. 

Pliny,  the  elder,  his  extraordinary  literary 
activity,  vi.  187.  His  death  from  the 
eruption  of  Vesuvius,  vii.  54,  59.  Plinv 
considered  as  a natural  philosopher,  226. 
Account  of  him,  and  of  his  mode  of  life, 
as  given  by  his  nephew,  264 

Pliny  the  younger,  his  description  of  the 
great  eruption  of  Vesuvius,  vii.  5S-61. 
Patronized  by  Domitian,  136.  His  con- 
sulship, 146.  His  attack  on  Certus,  164. 
His  *k  Panegyric  on  Trajan,”  vii.  180,439. 
Account  of  him,  his  friends,  and  corre- 
spondents, 250,  264. ' His  mode  of  life, 
265.  His  Laurentine  and  Tuscan  villas 
described,  268,  269.  His  letter  to  Trajan 
respecting  his  proceedings  against  the 
Christians,  288.  His  testimony  to  their 
virtues,  291,  439. 

Plotina,  wife  of  Trajan,  her  magnanimity, 
vii.  176.  Favours  Hadrian,  326.  Inter- 
cedes with  Trajan  for  the  adoption  of 
Hadrian  as  his  successor,  829.  Her  death, 
850.  The  Basilica  erected  by  Hadrian  at 
Nemausus  to  her  honour,  350. 

Plutarch,  his  philosophical  and  historical 
works,  lectures  and  opinions,  vii.  364,  365. 
Compared  with  Appian,  233. 

Poets,  Roman,  of  scholastic  training,  vii. 
228. 

Polemo,  king  of  Pontus  and  the  Bosporus, 
favoured  by  Augustus,  iv.  111. 

Polemo,  receives  the  throne  of  Cilicia  from 
Antonius,  iii.  190. 

Polemo,  crowned  king  of  Armenia  by  Ger- 
manicus, v.  63. 

Polemon,  the  sophist,  exempted  from  taxes 
by  Trajan,  vii.  363.  The  favourite  of  Ha- 
drian, 363.  Character  of  his  eloquence, 
and  death,  863.  His  rudeness  to  Anto- 
nius Pius,  405. 

Police  of  Italy  in  the  reign  of  Tiberius, 
v.  143. 

Poll-tax,  the,  iii.  421. 

Pollio,  C.  Asinius,  his  escape  from  the  mas- 
sacre of  the  Romans  by  Juba,  ii.  168.  His 
spiteful  detraction  of  Ctesar,  209.  His 
services  and  character  as  a personal  friend 
of  Csesar,  34S.  Receives  the  province  of 
Further  Spain,  366.  Left  to  suppress  a 
revolt  under  Sextus  Pompeius,  iii.  75. 
Commands  for  the  republic  in  Spain,  109, 
124.  Shrinks  from  attacking  Antonius 
and  Lepidus,  126.  Appointed  to  com- 
mand in  the  Transpadane  province  for 
Antonius,  177.  Countenances  the  enter- 
prise of  L.  Antonius,  179.  Superseded  in 


550 


INDEX. 


the  CisalpiLC  by  Alfenus  Yarns,  181.  Ne- 
gotiates terms  between  Antonius  and 
Octavius,  183.  Devotes  himself  to  stu- 
dious indolence,  217.  llis  library,  founded 
for  the  use  of  the  citizens,  235.  Excused 
from  arming  against  his  friend  Antonius, 
249. 

Pollius,  Statius’s  description  of  the  Surren- 
tine  villa  of,  vii.  269. 

Polybius,  the  freedman  of  Augustus,  v.  403. 

l’olybius,  a freedman  of  Claudius,  v.  404. 
A friend  of  Seneca,  banished  by  Messalina, 
424.  Seneca’s  “ Consolatio  ad  Polybium,” 
401. 

Polycarp,  bishop  of  Smyrna,  his  martyrdom, 
vii.  490. 

Polycletus,  freedman  of  Yitellins,  vi.  854. 

Pompeia,  married  to  Civsar,  i.  113  note4. 
Divorced  by  him  for  her  intrigue  with 
Clodius,  152.  Torture  of  her  slave  Abra, 
152. 

Pompeii,  city  of,  its  destruction,  first  by  an 
earthquake,  and  secondly  by  the  lava  of 
Vesuvius,  vii.  57.  Different  accounts  of 
the  event,  57,  59. 

Pompeii,  family  of  the,  traditions  connected 
with  the  fall  of  the,  iii.  205. 

Pompeiopolis,  the  name  of  Soli  changed  to, 
i.  48. 

Pompeius,  Strabo,  father  of  Cn.  Pompeius, 
i.  68.  Gives  the  Jus  Latii  to  the  Transpa- 
danes,  ii.  62.  His  interview  with  Scato, 
iii.  113. 

Pompeius,  Cnaeus,  Magnus,  his  contest  with 
Sertorius  in  Spain,  i.  40.  Saved  from 
total  rout  by  Mctellus,  40.  Quells  the 
revolt  of  the  Iberians,  42,  69.  Entrusted 
with  the  war  with  Mithridates,  45.  De- 
duces the  Cilician  pirates,  48.  Assists  in 
crushing  the  revolt  of  Spartacus,  52.  Ilis 
early  history,  68-70.  His  policy,  70. 
Unites  with  Crassus  and  Cicero  in  trans- 
ferring the  Judicia  to  the  knights,  72. 
Powers  conferred  on  him  by  the  Gabinian 
and  Manilian  Laws,  74.  Iiis  war  with 
Mithridates  78,  136.  Commencement  of 
his  intercourse  with  Caesar,  100.  Sus- 
pected by  the  nobles,  134.  Conquers 
Tigranes,  137.  Desists  from  the  pursuit 
of  Mithridates,  137.  Settles  the  affairs 
of  Syria  and  Palestine,  138, 139.  Decides 
between  the  claims  of  Hyrcanusand  Aris- 
tobulus  to  the  throne  of  Judea,  iii.  299. 
Preparations  of  the  nobles  against  designs 
imputed  to  him,  i.  140.  Returns  to  Italy, 
and  disbands  his  army,  149.  Reserved 
towards  the  senate  and  Cicero,  150. 
Presses  the  senate  to  ratify  his  acts,  158. 
His  triumph,  158.  The  first  Roman  repre- 
sented by  a naked  statue,  159  note  r\  His 
demands  for  an  agrarian  law,  160.  In- 
trigues for  his  own  aggrandizement,  153- 
163.  Divorces  his  wife  Mucia,  160.  His 
weakness,  dissimulation,  and  overtures 
to  Cajsar,  163-166.  The  nominal  head  of 
the  first  triumvirate,  168.  Conspiracy 
alleged  by  Yettius  against  his  wife,  174. 
Off  ers  his  hand  to  Julia,  Ciesar’s  daughter, 
176.  The  senate  warned  by  Cato  against 
him,  176.  His  behaviour  to  Cicero,  182- 
1S4.  Reduces  the  Gauls  to  subjection. 
211.  His  villa  at  Tusculum,  305.  Tunis 


against  Clodius,  and  assists  in  the  recall 
of  Cicero,  321,  322.  His  commission  for 
provisioning  Rome,  324.  His  dissension 
with  Crassus,  829.  llis  anxiety  to  obtain 
the  consulship,  330.  Opposed  by  the 
existing  consuls,  331.  Reconciled  to 
Crassus  by  Ca?sar’s  intervention,  833.  De- 
fended by  Cicero,  337.  Elected  consul, 
839.  Changes  his  policy,  340.  Spain 
assigned  to  him,  841.  His  danger  at  an 
election,  344.  Seeks  to  ingratiate  himself 
with  the  populace,  344.  His  theatre,  3 4-L 
Governs  Spain  while  remaining  in  Rome, 
346.  His  lresh  dissensions  with  Crassus, 
348.  Foments  the  consular  electoral  con- 
fu  si  on  s , 3 60.  Death  of  h i s w i fe  Julia,  362. 
llis  connection  with  Caesar  weakened  by 
this  event,  362,  863,  405.  Lends  a legion 
to  Citsar  for  his  sixth  campaign,  398.  "Re- 
turns to  his  aristocratic  opinions,  puts  an 
end  to  the  interregnum,  and  procures  the 
election  of  the  consuls,  432.  The  sub- 
stance of  the  dictatorship  thrust  into  his 
hands,  437.  Declared  sole  consul  and  pre- 
sides at  the  trial  of  Milo,  438.  Compared 
with  Sulla,  ii.  40.  His  reforms,  conduct 
at  the  head  of  affairs,  and  salutary  admin- 
istration, 42-46.  Courts  the  oligarchy, 
marries  Cornelia,  and  takes  her"  father 
Seipio  for  his  colleague  in  the  consul- 
ship, 47.  His  inconsistent  and  arbitrary 
conduct,  and  unfairness  to  Ca?sar,  47. 
His  double  dealing  with  regard  to  C 
sar’s  petition  for  the  consulship,  48. 
Supports  the  decree  of  M.  Marcellos, 
aimed  directly  against  Ca?sar,  60.  His 
sickness  at  Neapolis,  63.  Grief  of  the 
Italians,  and  enthusiasm  at  his  recovery, 
64.  Required  by  the  senate  to  surrender  a 
legion,  19.  Demands  a legion  from  Ca*sar, 
72.  Nominated  guardian"  of  the  city,  74. 
llis  idle  boast,  75.  His  inaction,  and  in- 
terview with  Cicero,  79.  His  equivocal 
position  and  military  force,  84.  Retires 
from  Rome  on  the  news  of  Caesar’s  passage 
of  the  Rubicon  and  conceals  his  plans,  93. 
Has  an  interview  with  Cicero  at  Form  ice, 
93.  His  want  of  principle,  95.  His  nego- 
tiations with  Ccesar,  98.  Joined  by  La- 
bienus  at  Teanum,  89.  Falls  back  upon 
Luceria,  102.  Retreats  to  Brundisium 
and  prepares  to  cross  over  to  Epirus,  ll)7. 
Quits  Italy,  108.  Indignation  of  the  no- 
bles at  his  conduct,  and  probable  motives 
for  it,  111-117.  Proclaims  wrar  against 
Rome,  118.  Preparations  ofhis  lieutenants 
in  Spain  to  meet  Ccesar,  133.  Pompeius’s 
road  across  the  Pyrenees,  132.  Sends  L. 
Nasidius  with  a fleet  to  Massilia,  156.  His 
>osition  compared  with  that  of  Caesar,  1S6. 
Enumeration  of  his  forces,  187-189.  Moves 
from  Thessalonica,  and  forms  lines  before 
Dyrrhachium,  198.  Dislodged,  but  takes 
position  at  Petra,  where  he  is  blockaded 
by  Ca?sar,  206.  Maintains  his  ground  and 
gains  advantages  at  sea,  212,  218.  Defeats 
the  Ca?sarians  before  Petra,  218-220. 
Triumph  of  his  military  skill,  220.  Exul- 
tation and  violence  of  his  partizans,  221. 
Accepts  the  title  of  Imperator,  but  declines 
a general  engagement,  221,  Compelled 
by  ’ his  partizans  to  follow  Caesar  into 


INDEX. 


551 


Thessaly,  225-227.  His  position  in  the  1 
plain  of  Pharsalia,  227.  Offers  battle,  229. 
Routed  and  flies,  235,  236.  Escapes  to 
the  sea  coast,  embarks,  and  takes  up  his 
wife  Cornelia  and  his  son  Sextus  at  Les-  j 
bos,  242.  Bequests  an  asylum  at  Alexan- 
dria, is  invited  to  land,  and  treacherously 
murdered,  244-246.  Reflections  on  his 
death,  247.  Final  disposal  of  his  remains, 
249. 

Pompeius.  Cnceus,  son  of  Magnus,  brings 
reinforcements  to  his  father  from  Alex- 
andria, ii.  188.  His  exploits  at  sea,  213. 
His  violence  to  Cicero  at  Corcyra,  251. 
His  estates  confiscated  by  Caesar,  279. 
Joins  Cato,  and  is  left  in  charge  of  the 
Pompeian  fleet  in  the  Lesser  Syrtis,  2S3, 
234.  Urged  by  Cato  to  revive  the  war  in 
Spain,  is  repulsed  in  Mauretania,  and 
takes  refuge  in  the  Balearic  isles,  288. 
Sick  in  the  Baleares,  305.  Takes  the 
command  of  the  Pompeians  in  Spain,  315. 
Views  the  contest  as  a private  quarrel, 
315.  Is  defeated  at  Munda  by  Caesar, 
overtaken,  and  slain,  316,  317. 

Pompeius,  Q.,  Rufus,  tribune,  grandson  of 
Sulla,  his  daughter  Pompeia  married  to 
Caesar,  i.  103  note  K Imprisoned  by  the 
senate,  431.  Brought  to  the  bar  of  justice, 
ii.  44. 

Pompeius  Sextus,  son  of  Magnus,  accompa- 
nies his  father  from  Pharsalia,  ii.  242.  His 
estate  confiscated  by  Caesar,  279,  Flies 
with  Cornelia  to  Africa,  283.  Sole  sur- 
vivor of  the  senatorian  leaders,  317.  Asi- 
nius  Pollio  sent  against  him,  366.  His 
struggle  against  the  Caesarian  lieutenants 
in  Spain,  iii.  18.  His  successes  in  the 
south  of  Spain,  75.  Appointed  to  the 
command  of  the  republican  navy,  129. 
Raises  the  standard  of  liberty  in  Macedo- 
nia, 145.  Seizes  upon  Sicily,  160, 173,  182. 
Octavius  arms  against  him,  161.  Defeats 
Salvidienus,  161.  His  increasing  power 
in  the  islands,  179.  Joins  Ant.onius  against 
Octavius,  1S2.  Hovers  round  the  coast  of 
Lucania  and  Apulia,  182.  His  character 
as  drawn  by  Velleius,  1S5,  186.  Accepts 
overtures  from  the  triumvirs,  and  admit- 
ted into  partnership  with  them  by  the 
treaty  of  Misenum,  187.  Breaks  the  treaty, 
193.  ' Defeats  Octavius,  194.  But  does 
not  profit  by  his  victory,  195.  Again  de- 
feats Octavius,  200.  Bouted  by  Agrippa, 
and  escapes  into  the  East,  201.  His  sub- 
sequent career,  capture  by  the  Antonians, 
and  death,  203-20o. 

Pomponia  Grsecina,  an  early  Christian,  story 
of,  vi.  215. 

Pomponianus  put  to  death  by  Domitian, 
vii.  147. 

Pons  iElii  (Newcastle-on-Tyne),  vii.  347. 

Pont  du  Gard,  construction  of  the  aqueduct 
of  the,  vii.  405. 

Ponticus,  his  martyrdom  at  Lyons,  vii. 
332. 

Pontifex  Maximus,  Caesar  elected  to  the 
office  of,  i.  113.  Importance  of  the  su- 
preme pontificate,  iii.  371.  The  pontifices, 
epulones,  quindec<  mvirs,  and  augurs,  371. 
Augustus  pontiff,  371. 

Pontiffs,  college  of,  duties  of  the,  iii.  371. 


Pontius  Aquila,  his  rudeness  to  Caesar,  ii 
361. 

Pontius  Pilatus.  See  Pilatus. 

Pontus.  kingdom  of,  given  by  Antonius  to  a 
son  of  Pharnaces,  iii.  190. 

Popilius  puts  Cicero  to  death,  iii.  147. 

Poppaja,  her  connection  with  Valerius  Asia- 
ticus,  v.  416.  Commits  suicide,  417. 

Poppa?a  Sabina,  wife  (1)  of  Rufius  Crispinus, 
(2)  of  Otho,  vi.  97.  Her  beauty,  character, 
and  intrigue  with  Nero,  97.  Exasperates 
him  against  Agrippina,  99.  Demands 
Octavius’  death,  122.  Marries  Nero,  123. 
Her  death  and  divine  honours  paid  her, 
156,  238. 

Population  of  Rome,  accurate  returns  of, 
iii.  420 ; iv.  329.  Of  the  empire,  332.  Of 
Italy,  333-339.  Of  the  provinces,  340-343. 
Ancient  and  modern  population  of  the 
Roman  dominions  compared,  343,  344. 
Approximate  estimate  of  the  population 
of  Rome:  1.  From  the  area  of  the  city, 
394.  And  extent  of  the  suburbs,  396.  2. 
From  the  recorded  number  of  houses,  398. 
3.  From  the  number  of  recipients  of  grain, 
399.  Exaggerations  of  ancient  and  mod- 
ern authorities,  401.  The  circumstances 
of  Rome  do  not  admit  of  a very  large  pop- 
ulation, 403.  The  population  of  the  Roman 
provinces  in  the  reign  of  Antoninus  Pius, 
vii.  417.  Decrease  of  the  population,  and 
its  causes,  at  the  death  of  M.  Aurelius, 
4S1.  See  also  Census. 

Porcia,  wife  of  M.  Brutus,  iii.  70.  Her 
courage  and  resolution,  72.  Death  of  her 
husband,  169.  Commits  suicide,  170. 

Porus,  an  Indian  king,  sends  an  embassy  to 
Augustus,  iv.  11S. 

Posidonius,  his  travels  in  Gaul,  i.  212. 

Post  system  of  the  Roman  empire,  iv.  80. 

Postumus,  helps  to  defray  the  expense  of 
the  shows  in  honour  of  Caesar,  iii  63. 

Potestas  tribunitia.  the,  conferred  on  Augus- 
tus for  life,  iii.  342. 

Pothinus,  the  Greek  eunuch,  counsellor  of 
Ptolemeeus  XII.  of  Egypt,  ii.  244.  Put  to 
death  by  Caesar,  260. 

Pothinus,  his  martyrdom  at  Lyons,  vii.  490. 
245. 

Praaspa,  capital  of  Media  Atropatene,  be- 
sieged by  Antonius,  iii.  221. 

Praeneste,  outbreak  of  the  gladiators  at, 
vi.  143. 

Praetorian  cohorts,  establishment  of  the,  iii. 
412.  Humber  of,  in  the  time  of  Tiberius, 

v.  142.  The  praetorian  camp  establisned 
by  Sejanus,  173.  Carry  off  Claudius  to 
their  camp  and  swear  allegiance  to  him, 
367.  The  praetorians  recruited  in  Italy, 

vi.  257.  Their  pay  and  privileges,  258. 
Proclaim  Otho  emperor,  and  murder 
Galba  and  Piso,  306-312.  Disbanded  by 
Vitellius,  343.  Re-embodied  by  Valens, 
354.  Their  camp  stormed  and  taken  by 
the  Flavians.  370.  Original  object  of  the 
praetorian  guard,  vii  442.  Its  decline  and 
fall,  442. 

Praetors,  position  and  duties  of  the.  ander 
the  empire,  iii.  400.  Character  of  their 
perpetual  edicts,  vii.  426. 

Prasutagus,  king  of  the  Iceni,  submits  ta 
Eome^  vi.  28.  His  death,  44.  Indlgnitie* 


552 


INDEX. 


to  which  his  wife  and  children  were  sub- 
mitted, 44. 

Prefect  ot  the  city,  his  duties  under  the 
empire,  iii.  402.  Formal  institution  of  the 
prefecture  of  the  city,  iv.  145. 

Prefects  of  the  provinces,  character  of  their 
edicts,  vii.  426. 

Priscianus,  conspires  against  Antoninus 
Pius,  and  slays  himself,  vii.  899. 

Priscus,  Lutorius,  found  guilty  of  construct- 
ive treason,  and  executed,  v.  126. 

Priscus,  prefect  of  the  praetorians,  his  suicide, 
vi.  316. 

Proculus,  Scribonius,  killed  in  the  senate 
house,  v.  360. 

Proculus,  put  t'  death  by  Nero,  vi.  273. 

Proculus,  Licinius,  chosen  prefect  of  the 
prcetorians,  vi.  312. 

Princeps  senatus,  original  import  and  privi- 
leges of  the,  iii.  352.  Its  signification  ex- 
tended under  the  emperors,  855. 

Proeillus,  C.  Valerius,  thrown  into  chains 
by  Ariovistus,  i 259  note  ■.  Recovered, 
262. 

Proconsuls,  their  government  of  the  prov- 
inces, and  enormous  patronage,  i.  35.  The 
proconsular  imperium,  its  privileges  aud 
growth,  iii.  346, 347.  Payment  of  the  pro- 
consuls  under  the  empire,  407.  Office  of 
proconsul  at  the  same  period,  407.  Inde- 
pendent position  of  the,  vi.  259.  Their 
government,  260. 

Profcssio,  the,  defined,  iv.  326. 

Propertius,  his  losses  by  confiscation,  iii. 
177;  iv.  459.  His  description  of  the  bat- 
tle of  Actium,  iii.  254.  Patronized  by 
Maecenas,  iv.  459.  His  versification,  460. 
An  unskilful  flatterer,  460. 

Property,  original  Roman  law  of,  ii.  412. 
Affected  by  the  decisions  of  the  praetors, 
413.  Gradually  modified  by  the  princi- 
ples of  natural  reason,  414.  Taxes  on  the 
succession  of  property  under  the  empire, 
iii.  424. 

Pioscriptions,  the  first,  decreed  by  law,  i. 
31.  Those  of  Sulla,  54.  Horror  of  the 
Romans  of  the  proscriptions  of  Sulla,  484. 
Those  of  the  second  triumvirate,  iii.  139. 
Of  Domitian,  vii.  97, 146. 

Protogenes,  the  delator,  v.  360. 

Province,  the  Roman  possessions  so  called, 
i.  33, 197.  Its  importance,  197.  Lands  in 
the  Province  demanded  by  the  Cimbri  and 
Tcutones,  202.  Oppression  of  the  Prov- 
ince, 207. 

Provinces,  the  Roman ; Gallia  Cisalpina.  i. 
82.  Sicily.  32.  Sardinia  and  Corsica,  32. 
Spain,  the  Province,  Narbo,  and  Tolosa,  32. 
The  provinces  beyond  the  Adriatic,  32. 
Relation  of  the  provincials  to  Rome,  34. 
Government  of  the  provinces,  35.  Fiscal 
oppressions  of  the  farmers  of  the  reve- 
nues, 36.  Wrongs  and  discontents  of  the 
provincials,  36.  Breaking  out  of  their 
discontent  in  various  quarters,  37.  At- 
tempts of  Lucullus  to  reform  the  provin- 
cial administration,  44.  The  Province  at- 
tacked by  the  Gaulish  chief  Drappes,  ii. 
87.  Declares  in  favour  of  Ga?sar,  162. 
Municipal  institutions  in  the  provinces, 
iii.  410.  Division  of  the  provinces  iiito 


imperial  and  senatorial,  410.  Organiza- 
tion of  the  provinces  by  Augustus," iv.  60. 
Tiberius’s  administration,  v.  144.  Their 
condition  in  the  time  of  Nero,  vi.  257.  In 
dependent  position  of  the  proconsuls  in 
the  provinces,  259.  State  of  the  provinces 
and  attitudes  of  the  legions  and  their 
chiefs  at  the  accession  of  Galba,  296.  Re- 
volts in  the  eaily  part  of  the  reign  of 
Vespasian,  8S4,  et  seq.  Settled  tranquil- 
lity in  the  Antonine  era,  vii.  12.  Trajan’s 
architectural  works,  204.  His  vigilance  in 
the  administration  of  the  provinces,  206. 
Ilis  journeys  through  the  provinces,  341. 
Threatened  disturbances  on  the  frontiers 
in  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of  Antoninus 
Pius,  400.  Population  of  the  provinces  in 
the  reign  of  Antoninus  Pius,  416.  Con- 
stant degradation  of  the  character  of  Ro 
man  citizenship  in  the  provinces,  420. 
Character  of  the  edicts  of  the  prefects, 
427.  Methods  and  principles  of  law  pro- 
cedure, 427.  Relations  of  Roman  and  na- 
tive usage,  428.  Government  of  the  prov- 
inces by  senators,  434. 

Ptolemieus  Apion,  surrenders  the  Cyrenaica 
to  the  Romans,  iv.  93. 

Ptolema?us  XI.,  king  of  Egypt,  rebellion  of 
his  subjects,  i.  310.  Applies  for  the  inter- 
vention of  Rome,  310,  327.  Cato's  advice 
to  him,  311.  Resolution  of  Gabinius  to 
restore  him  to  bis  throne,  349.  The  va- 
cant throne  bestowed  by  the  population  of 
Alexandria  upon  his  daughter  Berenice, 
850.  Restored  by  Gabinius,  852.  Puts 
Berenice  to  death,  352.  Leaves  his  king- 
dom under  the  guardianship  of  Rome, 

243.  His  revenue,  iii.  280. 

Ptolemaeus  XII.,  king  of  Egypt,  succeeds 

with  his  sister  Cleopatra  to  the  throne,  ii. 

244.  Their  quarrels,  244.  His  treachery 
to  Pompeius,  244,  245.  Summoned  by 
Caesar  to  Alexandria,  255.  Kept  in  cus- 
tody there,  255.  Restored  to  his  subjects 
by  Ca?sar,  262.  Immediately  leads  an  at- 
tack upon  Caesar’s  position,  262.  Defeated 
and  drowned  at  the  battle  of  the  Nile,  263. 

Ptolemaeus  XIII , visits  Rome  with  his  sis- 
ter Cleopatra,  ii.  341.  His  death,  iii.  176. 

Ptolemaeus,  son  of  Ant.onius  and  Cleopatra, 
Roman  provinces  assigned  by  Antonius 
to,  iii.  226. 

Ptolemams,  son  of  Juba,  king  rr  Maureta- 
nia, put  to  death  by  the  emperor  Caius,  v. 
353. 

Ptolemaeus,  Claudius,  his  great  work  on 
geography,  vii.  402. 

Ptolenneue,'  king  of  Cyprus,  deprived  of  his 
kingdom,  i.  307-309. 

Publicani,  or  farmers  of  the  public  revenue, 
their  oppressions  in  the  provinces,  i.  37. 
Attempts  of  Lucullus  to  reform  their 
abuses,  44. 

Publicola,  L.  Gellius,  appointed  to  the  re- 
vived office  of  censor,  i.  73. 

Puteoli,  visit  of  Caesar  to  Cicero,  at,  ii.  301. 

Pyrenees,  military  road  of  Pompeius  across 
the,  ii.  132. 

Pythodoris,  queen  of  Pontus  and  the  Bos- 
*phorus,  her  abilities,  iv.  111.  Marries 
Archelaus,  king  of  Cappadocia,  111. 


INDEX. 


553 


QUADI,  wars  of  M.  Aurelius  with  the,  vii. 
464,  466-4(38. 

yuadratus,  bishop  of  Athens,  his  apology 
for  the  Christians  received  by  Hadrian, 
vii.  369. 

Quadratus,  prefect  of  Syria,  quells  an  insur- 
rection in  Galilee,  vi.  422.  His  dissen- 
sions with  Corbulo  and  dismissal,  424. 
Quiestiones  perpetuas,  institution  of  the,  v. 
107. 

Qua>stors,  the,  under  the  empire,  iii.  401. 
Quarries,  revenue  derived  from,  iii.  423. 
Quindecemvirs,  their  duties,  iii.  371. 
“Quinquennium  Neronis,”  the,  vi.  85,  93. 
Quintilian,  perhaps  the  first  schoolmaster 
who  obtained  the  consular  ornaments,  vii. 
29,  136.  His  origin,  employments,  and 
writings,  vii.  225.  Compared  with  Sen- 
eca, 225,  226. 

Quintilis,  the  month,  its  name  changed  to 
J ulius,  iii.  65,  73,  374. 

Quirinal  hill,  the,  i.  18.  In  the  time  of  Au- 
gustus, iv.  375. 

Quiritary  proprietorship,  embracing  exemp- 
tion from  the  land-tax,  reluctantly  given 
by  the  emperors,  vii.  418. 

ABIRITJS,  the  senator,  prosecution  of,  i. 
107. 

Hauraci,  the,  join  the  Helvetii,  i.  340. 
Itavenna,  Caesar  stations  himself  at,  ii.  78, 
89.  Importance  of  in  Czesar’s  time,  89. 
Recitation,  custom  of,  at  Roman  suppers,  iv. 
430. 

Registers,  statistical,  of  the  empire,  iv.  826- 
329. 

Regni,  a British  tribe,  their  dwelling-place, 
vi.  18.  In  friendly  relation  with  the  Ro- 
mans, 21,  28. 

Regulus,  Livineius,  defends  Cn.  Piso,  v.  80. 
Religion,  Roman,  its  fundamental  principle, 
iv.  17.  Its  invigoration  undertaken  by 
Augustus,  17.  Religious  functions  of  the 
patrician  houses,  22.  Augustus's  restora- 
tion of  the  temples,  24.  And  of  the  pop- 
ular worship  of  the  Lares,  25.  Varieties 
of  religion  in  the  Roman  empire,  302. 
The  vulgar  notion  of  a deity,  v.  291. 
Measures  taken  by  Claudius  for  the  con- 
servation of  the  national  religion,  387. 
Alliance  of  philosophy  with  religion  at 
Rome,  vi.  18S.  Stoics,  and  Stoicism,  ii. 
401;  vi.  190.  The  revival  of  religion  un- 
der Augustus  to  a great  extent  a genuine 
movement,  196.  Position  of  the  Roman 
religion  in  relation  to  the  superstitions  of 
Gaul  and  Syria  respectively,  199.  Arrival 
of  the  time  for  the  appreciation  of  the 
idea  of  the  Divine  Unity,  the  essential 
dogma  of  Judaism,  203.  General  religious 
toleration  in  Rome  under  Nero,  223.  Sto- 
i«  ism  and  Christianity,  232. 

3erii,  a Belgian  tribe,  their  power,  i.  266. 
T aken  under  Roman  protection  by  Caesar. 
26S.  Their  capital  Bibracte  besieged  by 
the  confederate  Belgas,  268.  Devote 
themselves  to  Roman  interests,  397. 
Rescripts  and  constitutions  of  Augustus,  iii 
378. 

Revenue,  Roman,  mode  of  drawing  the,  i. 
86.  Fiscal  oppressions,  87.  Attempts  of 
Lucullus  to  reform  the  abuses  of  the  pub- 

139 


licani,  44.  Objects  of  public  expendi- 
ture under  the  commonwealth,  iii  417. 
Under  the  empire,  418.  Sources  of  reve- 
nue : 1.  The  pubLic  domains,  419.  2.  The 
tributun,  419.  3.  The  capitatio,  420. 

Mode  of  payment  of  the  revenue,  42L 
Revenue  derived  from  mines  and  quar- 
ries, 423.  From  salt  works,  fisheries,  and 
forests,  423.  Customs  and  excise,  424. 
Taxes  on  the  succession  of  property  and 
enfranchisement  of  slaves,  424.  The*  pub- 
lic aerarium  and  the  emperors  fiscus,  425. 

Rhzetians,  their  formidable  position,  iv.  159. 
Overthrown  by  Drusus,  160. 

Rhascupolis  of  1 brace  joins  Pompey  in  the 
civil  war,  ii.  188. 

Rhetoricians,  Greek,  Cicero’s  character  of 
the  halls  of  the,  i.  97.  The  schools  of  the 
rhetoricians  in  Rome,  iv.  432. 

Rhine,  Roman  chain  of  fortresses  on  the,  iv. 
176.  Canal  of  Drusus  from  the  Rhine  to 
Lake  Flevus,  179.  Extension  of  the  Ro- 
man government  between  the  Rhine  and 
the  Elbe,  265.  The  frontiers  of  the  Ro- 
man empire  finally  bounded  by  the  Rhine, 
v.  45.  Number  of  legions  stationed  on 
the  Rhine  in  the  time  of  Augustus  and 
Tiberius,  142.  The  emperor  Caius  on  the 
Rhine,  and  his  mummeries  there,  847. 
Trajan's  bridge  over  the  Rhine  at  Mainz, 
vii.  176.  His  rampart  from  the  Rhine  to 
the  Danube,  177. 

Rhodes,  nautical  skill  of  the  people  of,  ii. 
261.  Chastised  by  the  republicans,  iii, 
161.  Once  mistress  of  the  sea,  iv.  107.  Re- 
markable for  its  poor  law,  its  arsenals, 
and  its  schools  of  philosophy,  107.  De- 
prived of  its  antonomy,  vii.  23. 

Roads,  military,  of  Agrippa,  through  Gaul 
iv.  80.  Over  the  Alps,  89.  Roads  and 
rate  of  travelling  by  land  in  the  time  of 
Augustus,  321-323.  Description  of  the 
roads  approaching  Rome,  358.  The  Ap- 
pian  way  described,  368,  369.  The  Fla- 
minian  Way,  386. 

Rome,  the  city  of,  local  features  of  its  ori- 
ginal birthplace,  i.  18.  Its  adaptation  as  a 
shelter  to  crime  and  rapine,  18.  Native 
ferocity  of  its  inhabitants,  18.  Their  ha- 
tred of  foreigners,  19.  Struggles  between 
the  patricians  and  plebeians,  21,  22.  The 
contest  transferred  to  the  richer  and 
poorer  classes,  24.  Proprietary  enact- 
ments : the  Licinian  rogations  and  agra- 
rian laws  of  the  Gracchi,  25.  Concession 
of  the  Latin  franchise  to  the  Italian  allies, 
28.  Triumph  of  the  popular  party  at 
Rome  contemporaneous  with  the  enfran- 
chisement of  the  Italians,  29,  30.  Oligar- 
chical reaction  under  Sulla,  and  ascend- 
ancy of  the  exclusive  or  Roman  policy, 
31.  Combinations  of  the  foes  and  sub- 
jects of  Rome  against  her  power,  38. 
Threatened  by  Spartacus  and  his  follow- 
ers, 52.  Corruption  of  the  government  at 
home,  52.  And  venality  and  violence 
displayed  at  the  elections,  53.  Dissolute 
character  of  the  mass  of  the  free  urban 
population,  53.  Moral  superiority  of  the 
knights  to  the  senators,  54.  Growth  of  a 
middle  class,  54.  Legal  rights  of  the  Ro- 
man citizen,  65.  Claims  of  the  provin- 


554 


INDEX. 


cials  to  comprehension,  56.  Gradual  en- 
lightenment of  Roman  statesmen,  57.  Ten- 
dency towards  a general  fusion  of  races, 
57.  Contemporaneous  manifestation  of 
Christianity  and  monarchy,  5S.  Develop- 
ment of  the  idea  of  unity,  58.  Revolt  of 
the  citizens  under  L.  Saturninus,  107. 
State  of  parties  in  Rome  immediately 
after  the  conspiracy  of  Catiline,  126.  Ori- 
gin of  the  rapid  transition  of  the  taste  of 
the  citizens  from  simplicity  to  luxury, 
159,  160.  First  transaction  of  the  Ro- 
mans beyond  the  Alps,  193.  Comparison 
between  the  Romans  and  Gauls  in  a mili- 
tary point  of  view,  282,  283.  View  of  the 
city  from  Tusculum  in  the  time  of  Cicero, 
304.  Political  nullity  of  the  Roman  wo- 
men and  their  consequent  security  in 
times  of  revolution,  318.  Riots  of  Clodius 
and  Milo,  322.  Pompeius  appointed  to  an 
extraordinary  commission  for  provision- 
ing the  city,  324,  Corrupt  state  of  the  city 
in  the  year  u.c.  701,  360.  The  laws  of 
war  as  understood  by  the  Romans,  402. 
Interregnum:  the  tribunes  prevent  the 
election  of  consuls,  431.  Consuls  elected 
in  the  seventh  month  of  the  year,  432,  433. 
General  opinion  of  the  necessity  of  a dic- 
tator, 433.  Riot  and  conflagration  in  the 
city  on  the  death  of  Clodius,  436.  Caesar’s 
splendid  buildings  at  Rome,  ii.  10.  Exul- 
tation of  the  people  at  Caesar’s  victories, 
10, 11.  State  of  parties  at  Rome  during 
the  consulship  of  M.  Claudius  Marcellus 
and  S.  Sulpicius  Rufus,  58.  Consterna- 
tion of  the  city  at  Caesar’s  passage  of  the 
Rubicon,  91.  The  city  evacuated  by  the 
senate,  94.  War  against  Rome  declared 
by  Pompeius,  122.  Csesar  repairs  to  Rome 
in  person,  118.  And  plunders  the  sacred 
treasure  in  the  temple  of  Saturn,  125. 
Administration  of  M.  Lepidus  in  the  city, 
170.  Announcement  at  Rome  of  the  bat- 
tle of  Pharsalia  and  the  death  of  Pom- 
peius, 269.  Celebration  of  Caesar’s  four 
triumphs,  308.  Dedication  of  the  Julian 
forum,  313.  Tranquillity  of  the  city 
during  Caesar’s  absence  in  Spain,  346. 
Rumours  and  anticipations,  355.  Arrival 
of  tidings  of  the  victory  of  Munda,  356. 
Decrees  passed  in  Caesar’s  honour,  356. 
His  last  triumph,  357.  Adoption  of  the 
Etruscan  institutions  by  the  citizens,  395. 
Character  of  the  people,  397.  The  Etrus- 
can discipline  gradually  supplanted  by 
the  civilization  of  the  Greeks,  399.  Intro- 
duction of  free-thinking  at  Rome,  404. 
Harmony  of  free-thinking  with  the  spirit 
of  the  age,  404.  Fatal  influence  of  Orien- 
tal superstitions,  405.  Austere  principles 
of  the  old  Roman  law  of  family,  408. 
Marriage,  409.  Parental  authority,  410. 
Original  law  of  property,  412.  The  bene- 
ficial effects  of  Greek  philosophy  confined 
to  a small  class,  416.  Human  sacrifices  at 
Itome,  416.  Influence  of  Greek  on  Ro- 
man literature,  417.  Roman  oratory,  422. 
Decay  of  military  discipline,  423.  Cor- 
ruption of  the  generals,  426.  Consterna- 
tion of  the  citizens  on  the  death  of  Caesar, 
iii.  7.  Occupation  of  Rome  by  Cesar’s 
assassins,  9.  His  gardens  beyond  the 


Tiber  bequeathe  1 to  the  people,  34.  Seen* 
in  the  city  at  the  funeral  of  Caesar,  36-43. 
Caesarean  outbreaks  in  the  city,  and  the 
consul  Dolabella’s  treatment  of  them,  53, 
54.  The  shows  exhibited  by  Octavias,  63. 
Exhibition  of  the  Ludi  Apollinares  by 
Brutus,  73.  Effect  produced  at  Rome  by 
Cicero’s  second  philippic,  99.  Horrors 
produced  by  the  proscription  under  the 
second  triumvirate,  143.  Famine  prices 
in  b.c.  40,  186.  The  triumvirs  assailed  in 
the  Via  Sacra,  187.  Rejoicings  in  the  cty 
on  the  termination  of  the  civil  wars,  189. 
Order  restored  in  the  city  by  Octavius, 
210.  Patrolled  for  the  first  time  by  a noc- 
turnal police,  211,  Decorations  of  Agrip- 
pa  during  his  aedileship,  234.  State  of  the 
city  during  the  absence  of  Octavius  in  the 
East,  311.  A census  of  the  Roman  people 
taken  by  Octavius,  328.  The  temple  of 
Apollo  on  the  Palatine  hill  consecrated  by 
him,  330.  Building  of  the  Pantheon,  339. 
Events  which  led  to  conferring  on  Au- 
gustus the  poteatas  consularis , 365.  Le- 
gislative and  judicial  functions  of  the  Ro- 
man people  under  the  republic,  876.  And 
under  the  empire,  386.  The  people  de- 
prived of  the  election  of  their  magistrates, 
388.  Importance  attached  to  the  due  sup- 
ply of  grain  to  the  city,  390.  Disastrous 
policy  of  free  distribution  of  corn,  391. 
Functions  of  the  senate  under  the  repub 
lie,  392.  And  of  the  knights,  397.  Positioi 
and  functions  of  the  executive  officers 
under  the  empire,  399-412.  Establish- 
ment of  a standing  army,  411.  The  navy 
of  Augustus,  416.  Objects  of  public  ex- 
penditure under  the  commonwealth,  417. 
Under  the  empire,  418.  The  public  reve- 
nue under  the  commonwealth  and  under 
the  empire,  417-420.  Restoration  of  the 
temples  of  Augustus,  iv.  24.  And  of  the 
popular  worship  of  the  Lares,  25.  Wor- 
ship of  the  god  Terminus,  27.  System  of 
augural  limitation  and  the  consecration 
of  boundaries,  28.  Marriage  among  the 
Romans,  30-40.  Regulations  of  Augustus 
for  the  distinction  of  classes,  41.  His  re- 
strictions on  the  manumission  of  slaves, 
42.  The  prospect  of  monarchy  not  dis- 
couraging to  the  Romans,  49.  Fondness 
of  the  people  for  the  games  of  the  circus, 
54.  The  people  felicitate  themselves  on 
the  signs  of  general  peace  and  prosperity, 
54.  Considerations  on  the  source  of  Ro- 
man history  at  this  period,  57.  Erection 
of  the  mausoleum  of  Augustus,  132.  And 
of  the  theatre  of  Marcellus,  133.  State  of 
affairs  at  Rome  during  the  absence  of  Au- 
gustus in  the  East,  137.  Enthusiasm  on 
the  return  of  Agustus,  138.  His  Ludi 
Saeculares , 142.  Institution  of  the  pre- 
fecture of  the  city,  145.  The  history  of 
Rome  assumes  the  character  of  a domes- 
tic drama,  197.  The  gardens  of  Maecenas 
on  the  Esquiline  hill,  198.  The  Accursed 
Field,  199,  Consternation  at  Rome  on 
the  outbreak  of  the  Pannonians,  Dalma- 
tians, &c..  248.  State  of  affairs  in  the  city 
at  this  period,  249.  Discontent  of  tha 
populace  manifested  in  many  ways,  249. 
Good  humour  restored  by  the  games  of 


INDEX 


555 


Tiberius,  250.  State  of  popular  feeling  at 
the  time  of  the  banishment  of  Ovid, 
264.  Temple  of  Concord  dedicated  by- 
Tiberius,  276.  The  census  of  the  year 
767  (a.  d.  14),  282.  Rome  the  emporium 
of  the  commerce  of  the  Mediterranean 
Sea,  313.  And  the  centre  of  communi- 
cations by  land,  321.  Survey  of  the  city, 
as  compared  with  other  cities  of  the  em- 
pire, 350,  et  seq.  The  life  of  the  Romans 
on  the  Campanian  coast,  363.  Approaches 
to  the  city,  865.  The  roads,  365.  The 
aqueducts,  365.  Solitude  of  the  country 
round  Rome,  366.  Tombs  by  the  road- 
side, 367.  The  Via  Appia,  367.  Entrance 
into  Rome,  369.  The  seven  hills,  369. 
The  Palatine,  370.  Its  temples  and  patri- 
cian residences,  372-375.  The  Quirinal, 
Yiminal,  and  Esquiline  hills,  375.  The 
Arx  and  Capitolium,376.  The  temple  of 
Jupiter  Tarpeius,  or  Capitolinus,  376. 
The  Clivus  Asyli  and  Clivus  Capitolinus, 
877.  The  Avcntine  hill,  878.  The  Great 
Circus,  379.  The  walls  of  Servius,  379. 
The  valleys  of  Rome,  380.  The  Forum 
Romanum,  3S0-382.  The  Argiletum  and 
Suburra,  382.  The  Forum  oi  the  C.Tsars, 

883.  The  Velabrum,  383.  The  Forum 
Boarium,  384.  The  Transtiberine  quarter, 

884.  The  Campus  Martius,  385.  The 
Pincian  hill,  387.  The  population  of  the 
city  chiefly  clustered  in  the  lower  parts  of 
the  city.  388.  Style  of  domestic  architec- 
ture, 389.  The  temples,  391.  The  two 
classes  of  dwellings — the  domus  and  the 
insulae,  392.  The  mansions  of  the  nobles, 

392.  The  cabins  of  the  poorer  citizens, 

393.  Approximate  estimate  of  the  popu- 
lation of  Rome,  394.  1.  From  the  area  of 
the  city,  394.  Extent  of  the  suburbs,  396. 
2.  From  the  recorded  number  of  houses, 
898.  8.  From  the  number  of  recipients  of 
grain,  899.  Exaggeration  of  ancient  and 
modern  authorities  on  this  subject,  401. 
The  circumstances  of  Rome  do  not  admit 
of  a very  large  population,  403.  Life  in 
Rome,  405.  The  thronging  of  the  streets, 
405.  Trades  exercised  in  them,  406. 
Crowds  of  loungers  and  gazers,  407.  In- 
terruption to  traffic  and  paucity  of  thor- 
oughfares, 407.  Demolition  of  houses,  407. 
Fires,  407.  Inundations,  408.  Places  of 
recreation  for  the  citizens:  Parks  and 
gardens,  409.  Theatrical  exhibitions,  410. 
Pantomime,  410.  Spectacles,  411.  The 
amphitheatre,  412.  The  circus,  414.  Char- 
iot races,  414.  Exhibition  of  wild  beasts, 
415.  Gladiatorial  combats,  416.  Senti- 
ments of  antiquity  on  these  bloody  spec- 
tacles, 416.  Fondness  of  the  Romans  for 
the  bath,  and  manners  in  them,  419.  The 
day  of  a Roman  noble,  421.  Coarseness  of 
the  luxury  of  the  Roman  table,  425.  Cus- 
tom of  recitation,  428.  Habits  of  decla- 
mation, 430.  The  schools  of  the  rhetori- 
cians, 432.  The  urban  and  preetorian 
guards  in  the  time  of  Tiberius,  v.  143. 
Suppression  of  the  Egyptian  and  Jewish 
rites  in  Rome  by  Tiberius,  150.  His  limi- 
tation of  the  right  of  asylum,  151.  Flagrant 
dissipation  of  the  times,  152.  Despair  of 
Tiberius  of  checking  it  by  sumptuary 


enactments,  153.  Shamelessness  cf  both 
sexes,  154.  The  praetorian  camp  estab- 
lished by  Sejanus,  174.  Its  site  and  di- 
mensions, 174.  The  emperor  Tiberius 
quits  the  city,  195.  Disastrous  occurrences 
ascribed  to  his  retirement,  200.  Confla- 
gration on  the  Cadian  hill,  201.  Progress 
of  delation,  201.  Confusion  at  Rome  on 
the  death  of  Sejanus,  227.  No  traces  of 
the  terrible  reign  of  Tiberius  visible  am<  ng 
the  populace,  263.  Rapid  succession  or 
executions  and  confiscations  of  the  empe- 
ror Caius,  304.  Colossal  conceptions  of 
this  emperor’s  buildings  and  architectural 
extravagances,  329.  His  aqueducts,  329. 
His  imperial  palace,  330.  His  bridge 
across  the  Velabrum,  381.  The  limits  of 
the  pomcerium  extended  by  Claudius,  377. 
Public  works  of  Claudius,  390.  Measures 
of  this  emperor  for  the  amusement  of  the 
citizens,  393.  Earthquake  at  Rome  in  a.tt. 
800,  449.  Failure  or  the  harvest  in  the 
provinces,  and  bread  riots  in  the  city,  449. 
Increasing  extravagance  of  the  shows  in 
the  time  of  Nero,  vi.  Ill,  126.  His  presence 
at  Rome  desired  by  both  populace  and 
senate,  126.  Infamous  debauchery  pub- 
licly encouraged  by  him,  127.  The  great 
fire  at  Rome,  128.  Rebuilding  of  the  city, 
135.  Extension  of  Nero’s  palace,  or  golden 
house,  138.  The  neighbourhood  of  Rome 
ravaged  by  storms  and  pestilence,  160. 
The  idea  of  tyranny  familiar  to  the  citi- 
zens, 176.  The  Roman  police  repressive, 
not  preventive,  178.  Freedom  of  thought 
among  the  citizens,  179.  System  of  educa- 
tion independent  of  priests  or  magistrates, 
180.  Literature  of  the  Romans,  183,  et  seq. 
Alliance  of  philosophy  at  Rome  with 
religion  and  government,  188.  Attract- 
iveness of  stoicism  to  the  noblest  charac- 
ters at  Rome,  192.  Position  of  the  re- 
ligion of  Rome  in  relation  to  the  super- 
stitions of  Gaul  and  Syria  respectively, 
199.  The  Syrian  worship  of  the  elements 
attractive  to  the  lower  order  of  women  at 
Rome,  200-202.  And  at  length  to  the 
men  also,  202.  The  Jews  at  Rome,  203. 
Influence  of  their  religion  over  the  citi- 
zens, 203,  et  seq.  Spiritual  pride  of  the 
Jewish  freedmen  in  the  city,  209.  Recep- 
tion of  Christianity  among  this  class  of 
Jews  and  their  proselytes,  210.  Nero’s 
persecution  of  the  Christians,  216,  217. 
Young  JR  owe  of  the  time  of  Nero,  240 
The  lazzaroni  of  the  city,  255.  Governed 
by  Helius  during  Nero’s  visit  to  Greece, 
276.  Nero’s  triumphal  return,  277  Un- 
easiness of  the  popular  mind  at  Rome  at 
the  forthcoming  struggle  between  Otho 
and  Vitellius,  328.  Sensuality  and  licen- 
tiousness of  the  city  in  the  reign  of  Vitel- 
lius, 355.  Attack  and  defence  of  the  Capi- 
tol by  the  Flavians  and  Vitellians,  865. 
And  conflagration  of  the  temple,  366.  The 
city  stormed  by  Antonius  Primus  and 
the  Flavians,  367.  And  Vitellius  slain, 
871.  Places  and  honours  divided  by  the 
Flavians  among  themselves,  372.  Decree 
of  the  senate  for  the  restoration  of  the 
Capitol,  374.  Strong  measures  of  Mucinniu 
in  the  city,  375.  Foundation  of  the  ne  v 


B56 


INDEX. 


Capitol,  378.  Architectural  works  of  the 
emperor  Vespasian,  vii.  27.  Demolition 
of  Nero’s  golden  house,  24,  33.  Erection 
of  the  arch  of  Titus,  83.  And  of  Titus's 
baths,  33.  Erection  of  the  Colosseum,  36. 
Fire  and  pestilence  at  Rome  in  the  reign 
of  Titus,  49.  Dedication  of  the  Colosseum, 
60.  Triumphal  and  other  monuments  of 
Domitian’s  successes,  91.  His  equestrian 
colossus  in  the  Forum.  91,  92.  His  build- 
ings in  Rome,  117.  The  Cult  of  Isis  a^d 
Cybele  naturalized,  121.  The  populace  or 
the  city  caressed  by  Domitian,  132.  The 
reign  of  terror,  and  last  months  of  this 
emperor , 149.  Trajan’s  column,  197,  199. 
His  libraries,  basilica,  and  temple,  198. 
The  Ulpian  Forum,  201.  Other  buildings 
of  Trajan  in  the  city,  203.  The  catacombs, 
286  note 3.  Magnificence  of  the  shows  of 
Hadrian,  339.  His  establishment  of  the 
Athenasum,  381.  His  buildings  in  the 
city,  382.  The  temple  of  Rome  and  Venus, 
882.  The  Mausoleum  or  Moles  Hadrian i, 
882.  Buildings  of  Antoninus  Pius,  404. 
Review  of  the  political  elements  of  Roman 
society  during  the  reign  of  Antoninus 
Pius,  415.  The  populace  of  the  city,  415. 
The  Antonine  column,  474. 

Rome,  empire  of,  effect  of  the  plunder  of 
temples  in  the  civil  wars  upon  the  circu- 
lation of  money  throughout  the,  iii.  316. 
Reflection  of  the  Romans  and  their  master 
(Augustus)  upon  their  position  towards 
each  other,  321.  The  public  revenue  under 
the  empire,  416-424.  General  tendency  of 
recent  events  towards  monarchy,  425,  429. 
Character  of  the  sovereignty  of  Augustus, 
429.  Harmonious  action  of  the  elements 
of  power  under  the  imperial  regime,  430. 
Conception  of  the  Romans  of  constitutional 
monarchy,  iv.  7.  Indifference  of  the  pub- 
lic mind  on  political  questions,  11.  Deg- 
radation of  Roman  sentiments  by  the 
mixture  of  races,  12.  Expansion  of  the 
primitive  ideal  of  Roman  life,  15.  Signs 
of  material  decay,  16.  The  fundamental 
principle  of  the  Roman  religion  still  sur- 
viving, 17.  Its  invigoration  undertaken 
by  Augustus,  17.  The  patrician  class,  its 
conservation  and  religious  functions,  19- 
23.  Unity  of  the  Roman  empire,  292. 
The  three  families  of  nations  in  the  East, 
West,  and  North,  294.  Their  political 
characteristics  contrasted,  295.  The  Bar- 
barian races  of  the  West,  297.  Elements 
of  variety  within  the  Roman  empire,  298. 
i.  Varieties  of  language,  298.  Latin  the 
official  language  of  the  whole  empire,  298. 
Prevalence  of  Greek  in  the  eastern  prov- 
inces, 299.  Preponderance  of  Latin  in  the 
Western  provinces,  300.  n.  Varieties 
of  religion,  302.  Their  local  independence, 
803.  in.  Distinction  of  classes,  304.  Citi- 
zens, subjects,  and  allies,  304  Slaves,  304 
Distinctions  of  condition  in  the  provinces, 
304.  Independent  communities  gradually 
reduced  to  subjection,  305, 306.  Numbers 
of  the  citizens,  307.  Extension  of  the 
franchise  by  the  manumission  of  slaves, 
808.  Indirect  effect  of  slavery  in  combin* 
mg  the  various  classes  of  men  together 
ilO.  Elements  of  unity  n the  Roman 


empire,  311.  Italy  the  centre  cf  the 
Mediterranean  Sea,  and  the  Mediterranean 
Sea  the  centre  of  the  empire,  392.  Rome 
the  emporium  of  the  commerce  of  the 
Mediterranean,  313.  Staples  of  commerce 
in  the  Mediterranean,  314.  Uses  of  gold 
and  silver  among  the  Romans,  317.  Ef- 
fect of  commerce  in  giving  unity  to  the 
empire,  818.  Security  of  maritime  com- 
merce under  the  empire,  320.  Rome  the 
centre  of  communications  by  land,  32L 
The  orl  is  pictus,  or  map  of  the  empire, 
iii.  422  ; iv.  323.  Chorographical  surveys, 
325.  The  census  and  the  professio,  325, 
Statistical  registers  of  the  empire,  326. 
The  Breviarium  Imperii  of  Augustus,  328. 
Information  possessed  by  the  Romans  on 
the  subject  of  population,  329.  The  Acts, 
or  Journal,  of  the  State,  331.  Inquiry 
into  the  population  of  the  empire,  832. 
The  population  of  Italy,  332-839.  The 
population  of  Italy  compared  with  that 
of  the  provinces,  340-342.  Ancient  and 
modern  population  of  the  Roman  domin- 
ions compared,  343.  A view  of  the  aggre- 
gate population  advances  the  idea  of  unity, 
343.  The  Pax  Romana,  or  idea  of  universal 
peace,  344.  Troops  and  fortifications  by 
which  this  peace  was  secured.  345.  Ac- 
quiescence of  the  subject  nations,  846. 
War  of  opinion  silently  generated  beneath 
the  surface  of  the  Roman  peace,  347.  Sur- 
vey of  the  great  cities  of  the  Roman  em- 
pire, 349-403.  The  frontiers  of  the  empire 
finally  bounded  by  the  Rhine,  v.  45.  Pas- 
sion of  the  Romans  for  accusation,  132. 
The  want  under  the  empire  of  great  and 
interesting  topics  for  eloquence,  133. 
Consolidation  of  the  Roman  dominion 
under  Tiberius,  139.  Who  follows  the 
advice  of  Augustus  in  not  extending  the 
limits  of  Roman  sovereignty,  140.  Sta- 
tions of  the  legions  under  Tiberius,  142. 
Question  of  the  succession  to  the  empire 
in  the  latter  years  of  Tiberius,  246.  Death 
of  Tiberius,  25S.  General  state  of  peace 
and  security  in  the  provinces  during  his 
reign,  265,  et  seq.  Philo’s  testimony  to 
this  fact,  quoted,  296.  Extravagant  luxury 
of  the  table  in  the  time  of  the  emperor 
Caius,  336.  Population  of  the  Roman 
empire  in  a.u.  800,  386.  Influence  of 
women  in  the  government  for  the  first 
time,  398.  General  purity  and  terseness 
of  style  of  the  Augustan  writers,  iv.  435. 
Titus  Livius,  436.  Virgil,  439.  Horace 
419,  452.  Attempts  of  Augustus  to  cor- 
rect the  deterioration  of  manners  among 
his  courtiers,  450.  Propertius,  45S.  Ti- 
bullus, 460.  Ovid,  462.  The  authority 
of  the  emperor  and  senate  over  matters 
of  national  usage,  v.  441.  State  of  patri- 
cian education  at  the  beginning  of  the 
Christian  era,  vi.  56.  Nero's  proposal 
to  abolish  the  vectigalia  considered,  87, 
et  seq.  Melancholy  reflections  of  Ta- 
citus on  his  task  as  a historian,  160.  Edu- 
cation of  the  Romans  under  the  empire, 
181, 182.  The  government  of  Nero  sup- 
ported by  the  voluptuousness  and  cruelty 
of  the  age,  225.  Reflections  on  the  de- 
praved morality  of  the  age,  226.  Counter 


INDEX. 


557 


acting  principles  of  virtue,  227.  Condi- 
tion of  the  Roman  senate  under  the  Clau- 
dian  Caesars,  252.  Impoverishment  of 
the  old  families  at  this  period,  254.  But 
general  increase  of  wealth  in  the  upper 
classes,  254.  The  commonalty  divided 
into  two  classes  : 1.  The  clients  of  the  old 
nobility,  255.  2.  The  patronless  prole- 

taries; the  lazaaroni  of  ancient  Rome, 
255.  Condition  of  the  provincials,  257. 
Preparations  of  Otho  and  Yitellius  for 
civil  war,  323.  Character  of  the  Flavian 
oi'  Antonine  period  of  Roman  history,  vii. 
7.  The  period  deficient  in  records,  9. 
The  temple  of  Janus  shut  by  Vespasian, 
10.  Tranquillity  of  the  provinces,  12. 
Attitude  of  the  German  tribes  towards 
Rome,  80.  Three  groups  of  barbarians  on 
the  northern  frontier,  on  the  Rhine,  the 
Danube,  and  the  Ister,  81,  82.  Internal 
history  of  Domitian’s  administration,  98. 
A decline  of  wealth  perceptible  in  Italy, 
113.  Trajan’s  vigilance  in  the  administra- 
tion of  the  provinces,  206.  Prevalence  of 
suicide  in  the  time  of  Trajan,  vii.  255. 
Voluptuousness  and  coarseness  of  the 
eriod,  260.  The  tone  of  society  corrupted 
y the  soldiery,  261.  Magnificence  of  the 
dwellings  of  the  nobles,  267.  Piinciple  of 
decorating  the  exterior  of  Roman  temples, 
but  the  interior  of  their  dwellings,  267. 
Considerations  on  the  taste  of  the  Romans 
in  building,  271.  Decline  of  energy  and 
disappearance  of  salient  features  of  char- 
acter among  the  Romans,  273.  Excep- 
tional manliness  of  Trajan,  Agricola,  and 
others,  274.  General  expectation  of  a 
deliverer  favoured  by  Augustus  and  Ves- 
pasian, 279.  Perils  of  the  empire  and 
question  of  the  succession  at  the  death  of 
Trajan,  312,  328.  The  great  geographical 
work  of  Claudius  Ptolemrcus,  402.  The 
Itinerary  of  Antoninus,  402.  Review  of 
the  epoch  of  Antoninus  Pius,  413-450. 
Population  of  the  provinces  in  this  reign, 
416.  Extension  of  the  Roman  franchise, 
417^421.  Progress  of  the  empire  towards 
uniformity,  423,  et  seq . Decline  of  public 
spirit  in  the  empire  coincident  with  the 
perfection  of  jurisprudence,  430.  Disturb- 
ances on  the  frontiers  in  the  reign  of  M. 
Aurelius,  453.  Inroads  of  the  barbarians 
along  the  whole  Danubian  frontier,  460. 
The  empire  depopulated  by  the  pestis 
Antonina , 461-463.  Comparative  strength 
of  the  barbarians  and  the  empire  at  the 
death  of  M.  Aurelius,  477.  Symptoms  of 
decline  of  the  empire,  479.  Contraction 
of  monetary  transactions  from  the  dimi- 
nution of  the  circulating  medium,  479. 
Decrease  In  the  population,  and  substitu- 
tion of  slave  for  free  labour,  480.  Effects 
of  vice  Rowing  from  the  institution  of 
slavery,  481.  Limits  of  material  improve- 
ment in  ancient  civilization,  483.  The 
decline  of  Roman  civilization  dates  from 
before  the  republic,  4S4.  Disastrous  ef- 
fects of  the  pestilence  and  other  national 
disturbances,  486.  Desperate  expedients 
for  resting  the  attacks  of  the  barbarians, 
487.  Revival  of  superstitious  observances, 
487  Persecution  of  the  Christians,  488. 


Reaction  in  favour  of  positive  belief,  491 
General  hopelessness  of  society  at  this 
period,  494. 

Roxolani,  aggressions  of  the,  in  Dacia,  vii. 
335.  Hadrian  takes  the  field  against 
them,  335.  Induced  to  retire  within  their 
own  lines.  336. 

Rubellius  Plautus,  great-great-grandson  of 
Augustus,  pretended  conspiracy  to  raiso 
him  to  the  throne,  vi.  79.  Put  to  death 
by  Nero,  120. 

RtiDicon,  the,  ii.  89.  Crossed  by  Caesar,  9L 

Rufus,  put  to  death  by  Nero,  vi.  273. 

Rullus,  Servilius,  the  tribune,  his  agrarian 
law,  i.  109. 

Ruscino,  a Gallic  city,  colonised  by  the  Ro  • 
mans,  i.  208. 

Rutupiae,  or  Richborough,  Caesar’s  camp  at, 
i.  386. 

QABAZIUS,  oracle  of,  iii.  60. 

U Sabina,  -wife  of  Hadrian,  vii.  326.  On  ill 
terms  with  him,  but  accompanies  him  on 
his  journeys,  350.  The  prefect  Clarus  and 
the  secretary  Suetonius  disgraced  for  dis- 
respect to  her,  350.  Visits  Thebes,  377. 
Her  death,  385. 

Sabinus,  Cornelius,  his  pretensions  to  tho 
empire,  vi.  295. 

Sabinus,  Flavius,  Vespasian’s  elder  brother, 
nominated  warden  of  the  city,  vi.  312. 
Sends  his  cohorts  to  his  brother’s  camp, 
338.  Leader  of  the  Flavian  party  at  Rome, 
363.  Takes  refuge  in  the  Capitol,  364. 
Slain,  367. 

Sabinus,  Flavius,  cousin  of  Domitian,  pro- 
scribed by  the  emperor,  vii.  147. 

Sabinus,  Julius,  joins  a conspiracy  to  liber- 
ate Gaul,  vi.  400.  Defeated  by  the  Se- 
quani,  402.  His  pathetic  story,  412. 

Sabinus,  Nymphidius,  prefect  of  the  prae- 
torians, induces  them  to  abandon  Nero, 
vi.  285.  Destroyed  by  them  for  attempt- 
ing to  seize  the  empire,  294. 

Sabinus,  Oppius,  the  prtetor,  slain  by  the 
Dacians,  vii.  88. 

Sabinus,  Q.  Titurius,  serves  under  Caesar  in 
Gaul,  i.  2(4,  291.  Defeats  the  Unelli,  294. 
Attacked  by  the  Eburones,  392.  Killed 
by  them,  393. 

Sabinus,  one  of  the  assassins  of  Caius,  com- 
mits suicide,  v.  369. 

Sabinus,  the  prefect,  declares  for  Vitellius, 
vi.  839. 

Sabura,  Juba’s  general,  charged  with  the  de- 
fence of  Cirta,  ii.  293.  Routed  and  slain 
by  Sitius,  296. 

Sacrifices,  human,  in  Rome,  ii.  416. 

Sacrovir,  Julius,  the  Druid  •warrior,  heads  a 
revolt  of  the  gEdui,  v.  168.  His  defeat 
and  death,  170. 

Sadala  of  Thrace,  joins  Pompeius  in  the 
civil  war,  ii.  188. 

Sadducees,  their  origin,  opinions,  and  poli- 
tics, iii.  296-298.  Support  John  Hyrca- 
nus,  298. 

Sarnia  lex,  for  raising  plebeian  families  to 
the  patriciate,  iv.  22. 

Salary,  origin  of  the  term,  iii.  405.  Official 
payment  of  salaries  under  the  empire, 
405. 

Salassi,  war  of  Octavius  against  the,  iii.  234 


558 


INDEX. 


Their  dwelling-place,  iv.  87.  Yarro’s 
treachery  and  destruction  of  the  whole 
tribe,  89. 

Ballustius,  the  historian,  his  quarrel  with 
Milo,  ii.  44.  Proscribed  by  the  censor 
Appius  Claudius,  73.  His  pungent  sa- 
tires, 74.  Restored  to  the  senate  by 
Crosar,  280.  Repulsed  by  the  mutinous 
soldiers  in  Campania,  252.  Apj/jinted 
proconsul  of  Numidia,  304. 

Salluvii,  territory  of  the,  taken  by  the  Ro- 
mans, i.  196. 

Salt-works,  revenue  derived  from,  iii.  423. 

Saivianus,  banished  by  Tiberius,  v.  184. 

Salvidienus  placed  in'command  of  a fleet  by 
Octavius,  iii.  161.  Defeated  by  Sextus. 
Pompeius,  161.  Recalled  from  Spain  by 
Octavius,  179. 

Salvius,  the  tribune,  murdered,  iii.  143. 

Salyi,  wars  of  Fulvius  Flaccus  against  the, 
i.  196. 

Samarobriva  (Amiens),  a city  of  the  Belgro, 
i.  226.  Assembly  of  Gaulish  tribes  at, 

^ 390.  Caesar  at,  391.  396. 

Sameas,  or  Shammai,  his  remark  respecting 
the  career  of  Herod  the  Great,  iii.  802. 

Samnites,  the,  defeated  at  Sentinum,  i.  191. 

Samnium  admitted  to  the  Latin  franchise, 
i.  24. 

Samos  seized  by  the  Cilician  pirates,  i.  48. 
Deprived  of  its  autonomy  by  Vespasian, 
vii.  23. 

Samosata,  capital  of  Commagene,  besieged 
by  Ventidius,  iii.  192. 

Bantones,  a Gallic  tribe,  i.  215. 

Saragossa,  the  ancient  Crosar- Augusta,  iv.65. 

Sardinia,  supply  of  grain  from,  to  Rome,  i. 
83.  The  government  of,  entrusted  to 
Cotta,  ii.  86.  Declares  for  Caesar,  121. 
State  of  the  island  in  the  time  of  Augus- 
tus, iv.  123.  Its  population  at  the  com- 
mencement of  the  empire,  340.  Four 
thousand  Jews  banished  from  Rome  to 
Sardinia  by  Tiberius,  v.  150. 

Sarmatians,  triumph  of  M.  Aurelius  over 
the,  vii.  473.  Renewal  of  the  war,  474. 

baserna,  his  contribution  towards  the  ex- 
pense of  the  shows  in  honor  of  Caesar,  iii. 
63. 

batala,  on  the  Lycus,  occupied  by  Trajan, 
vii  303,  304. 

Satrius  Secundus  reveals  to  Antonia  the 
conspiracy  of  Sejanus,  v.  223. 

Saturn,  temple  of,' in  the  Capitol,  the  treas- 
ury of  Rome  plundered  by  Caesar,  ii.  124. 

Baturninus,  C.  Sentius,  elected  consul,  iii. 
368.  Suppresses  a riot  in  the  city,  iv.  137. 
Joins  Tiberius  against  the  Marcomanni, 
245. 

Sato  minus,  L.,  heads  a revolt  in  Rome,  i. 
106.  Killed,  107. 

Baturninus,  L.  Antonins.  See  Antonins  Sa- 
tnrninus. 

Sauromatae,  submission  of  the,  to  Trajan, 
vii.  803. 

Serova,  the  slave,  kills  L.  Saturninus,  i.  107. 

Scrovinus,  conspires  with  Piso  against  Nero, 
vi.  147.  Discloses  the  plot,  149. 

Scrovola,  Mucius,  his  answer  to  Sulpicius,  iv. 
43. 

ftcoevola,  Q.,  tribune,  i.  361.  Stops  the  elec- 
tions for  consuls  by  his  intervention,  361. 


Scantinian  law,  enforced  by  Domitian.vit 
107. 

Scaptius,  agent  of  M.  Bratus  in  Cyprus,  his 
cruelty  at  Salamis,  i.  313. 

Scapula,  commands  the  republican  insur- 
gents  in  Spain,  ii.  305. 

Scaurus,  Ahnilius,  defeated  and  taken  pris- 
oner by  the  Cimbri  and  Teutones,  i 202. 
A candidate  for  the  consulship,  860.  Ap- 
pointed princeps  of  the  senate,  iii.  353. 

Scaurus,  M.,  taken  prisoner  at  Actium,  but 
pardoned,  iii.  258. 

Scipio,  Q.  Crocilius  Metellus,  his  daughter 
Cornelia  married  to  Cn.  Pompeius,  ii.  47. 
Associated  with  Pompeius  in  the  consul- 
ship, 47.  Restores  the  authority  of  the 
censors,  50.  Commands  for  Pompeius  in 
Macedonia,  211.  Advances  with  his  legions 
from  8yria  into  Macedonia,  214.  Plunders 
the  temple  of  Ephesus  on  his  way,  215. 
Compelled  by  the  Crosarians  to  entrench 
himself,  216.  Shares  the  honour  of  the 
chief  command  with  Pompeius,  225.  As- 
pires to  the  office  of  Pontifex  Maximus, 
225.  Commands  the  centre  at  Pharsalia, 
230.  Becomes  the  leader  of  the  Pom- 
eians  after  the  death  of  Pompeius,  251. 
ails  from  Patrro  for  Africa,  252.  Joins 
Varus  and  Juba  there,  283.  His  dispute 
with  Varus  at  Utica,  286.  Has  the  chief 
command  of  the  republican  army,  287. 
Worsted  by  Crosar  at  Uzita,  293.  Com- 
pletely defeated  by  Crosar  at  Thapsus,  295. 
His  death.  297,  310. 

Scodra,  in  Illyricnm,  made  the  boundary  be- 
tween the  dominions  of  Octavius  and  An- 
tonius,  iii.  185. 

Scribonia,  sister  of  Libo,  married  to  Octa- 
vius, iii.  183.  Divorced,  218.  Accompa- 
nies her  daughter  Julia  in  exile,  iv.  211. 

Scribonianus,  Furius  Camillius,  conspires 
with  others  against  the  life  of  Claudius,  v. 
409.  Banished  by  Claudius,  449. 

Scythed  chariots  used  by  the  Belgro,  i 226. 
And  by  the  Britons,  376. 

Sea-fights  exhibited  by  Claudius  on  the  Lake 
Fucinus,  v.  395. 

Sebaste,  the  Cappadocian,  founded  by  king 
Archelaus,  iv.  112. 

Sebaste,  in  Palestine,  visited  by  Agrippa,  iv. 
163. 

Seduni,  their  territory  occupied  by  S.  Galba, 
i.  286. 

Segestes,  chief  of  the  Cheruscans,  enrols 
himself  in  the  Roman  service,  and  warns 
Varus  against  Arminius,  iv.  271, 272.  Be- 
sieged by  Arminius,  v.  32. 

Segimerus,  father  of  Arminius,  enrols  him- 
self in  the  Roman  service,  iv.  271. 

Segni,  a Belgic  people,  i.  225.  Submit  to 
Crosar,  400. 

Segontiaci,  a British  tribe,  submit  to  Crosni, 
i.  388. 

Sejanus,  L.  iElius,  his  origin  and  early  his- 
tory, v.  94.  Appointed  prefect  of  the 
prrotorian  guards,  94.  His  birth  and  tal- 
ents inspire  no  jealousy  in  Tiberius,  161 
His  ambition  and  intrigues,  172.  Fstab- 
lishes  the  prrotorian  camp,  173.  His  mach- 
inations against  Drusus,  175.  Seduces 
Livilla,  wife  of  Drusus,  and  poisons  biro, 
176.  His  enmity  to  Agrippina  and  th<» 


INDEX. 


559 


children  of  Germanicus,  179.  His  evil  in- 
fluence on  Tiberius,  180.  Demands  the 
hand  of  Livilla  of  Tiberius,  who  rejects 
his  suit,  186-183.  His  renewed  intrigues, 
189.  Plots  the  ruin  of  Agrippina,  her  fam- 
ily, and  friends,  189,  190, 192,  201.  Saves 
the  life  of  Tiberius,  and  obtains  renewed 
favour,  202.  Homage  paid  Sejanus  by  all 
classes  of  the  citizens,  209.  His  arrogance, 
210.  Procures  the  banishment  of  Agrip- 
pina and  her  son  Nero,  and  the  disgrace  of 
Drusus,  216.  Affianced  to  Livilla,  and  ad- 
vances to  the  consulship,  219.  The  senate 
confers  on  him  jointly  with  Tiberius  the 
consulate  for  five  years,  221.  Decline  of 
his  influence,  221,  222.  The  emperor  re- 
fuses to  see  Sejanus,  who  concerts  meas- 
ures against  Tiberius’s  life,  222.  His  de- 
signs discovered  by  Antonia,  223.  Cir- 
cumvented by  Tiberius,  arrested  by 
Macro,  and  put  to  death,  225,  226.  Fall  of 
his  family,  kinsmen,  and  friends  with  him, 
227.  Proscription  of  his  children  and 
friends,  229.  Apicata,  his  divorced  wife, 
discloses  to  Tiberius  the  circumstances  of 
the  poisoning  of  Drusus,  231.  Massacre 
of  his  proscribed  friends,  238. 

Scleucia,  the  Parthian  court  established  at, 
i.  403.  Eeduced  by  Trajan,  vii.  306,  307. 

Beleucus,  a scion  of  the  Syrian  dynasty, 
married  to  Berenice,  queen  of  Egypt,  i. 
851.  Strangled  by  his  wife,  351. 

Senate,  the  judicia  restored  to  the,  by  Sulla, 
i.  32.  Constitutional  functions  of  the  sen- 
ate under  the  republic,  iii.  392.  Under 
Augustus,  393.  Method  of  transacting 
business  in  the  senate,  394.  Distinction 
of  the  senators,  395.  Claims  of  the  senate 
to  elect  the  emperors,  396.  Tiberius  in 
the  senate,  v.  17.  All  the  functions  of  em- 
ire  left  by  tacit  understanding  in  the 
ands  of  Tiberius,  17.  Powers  of  the 
senate  in  election,  legislation,  and  criminal 
jurisdiction,  99-108.  The  emperor’s  con- 
trol over  the  senate  through  the  powers 
of  the  censorship,  113.  Petition  of  a pau- 
per senator  rejected  by  Tiberius,  113.  His 
control  over  the  senate  by  the  law  of  ma- 
jestas,  113.  His  show  of  deference  to  the 
senate,  158.  His  will  annulled  by  the  sen- 
ate, 285.  Its  obsequiousness  to  the  em- 
peror Caius,  360.  Its  deliberations  on  the 
death  of  Caius,  365.  Yields  to  the  claims 
of  Claudius,  and  accepts  him  as  emperor, 
366.  Claudius  maintains  the  dignity  of 
the  order,  382.  Vacancies  supplied  from 
wealthy  provincial  families,  and  especially 
from  the  Gaulish  nobles,  383,  384.  Au- 
thority of  the  senate  in  matters  of  na- 
tional usage,  441.  Vows  and  sacrifices 
decreed  by  it  for  all  kinds  of  atrocities  in 
the  reign  of  Nero,  vi.  124.  Its  base  adu- 
lation, 151.  The  senate  the  idol  of  Lucan 
in  his  Pharsalia,  237.  Nero’s  proscrip- 
tions, 252.  Its  numbers  reduced  under 
the  tyranny  of  the  Claudian  Caesars,  252. 
Its  estimation  lowered  in  the  eyes  of  the 
citizens,  253.  Decrees  Nero  a public  en- 
emy, and  sanctions  the  election  of  Galba, 
291-293.  Accepts  the  adoption  of  Piso  by 
Galba  with  satisfaction,  301.  Suspected 
by  Otho’s  soldiers  of  treachery,  327.  Ac- 


cepts VitelliuB  as  emperor,  839.  Revised 
by  Vespasian,  vii.  21.  Domitian’s  pro- 
scription of  the  best  and  noblest  of  the 
senators.  146.  Trajan’s  measures  for  main 
taining  the  dignity  of  the  order,  212, 
Courted  by  Hadrian,  337.  Review  of  its 
position  during  the  Flavian  era,  431.  Cir- 
cumstances which  gave  a show  of  im- 
portance to  it  at  this  time,  431.  Inferior 
magistrates  only  elected  by  it,  432.  Gov- 
ernment ol  the  provinces  by  senators.  434. 
Their  usages  and  traditions  maintained 
by  their  pride,  435.  Their  triumphs  over 
the  freedmen,  436.  Their  favours  be- 
stowed upon  the  emperors,  who  provide 
them  with  conquests  and  plunder,  438. 
Deference  of  M.  Aurelius  to  the  senate, 
458. 

Seneca,  M.  Anna?us,  the  rhetorician,  his 
u Suasoriie  ” and  “ Controversy, ” iv.  433. 
His  sons,  vi.  162. 

Seneca,  L.  Annaeus,  the  philosopher,  con- 
demned by  Caius,  but  saved  by  a friend, 

v.  342.  Banished  by  Claudius,  407.  Re- 
called from  exile,  and  appointed  tutor  to 
Nero,  442.  Honours  Claudius  in  his  life- 
time as  a deity,  460.  His  “ Consolatio  ad 
Polybium,”  461.  His  satire  on  the  deifi- 
cation of  Claudius,  463.  Ilis  extravagant 
flattery  of  Nero,  466.  One  of  the  imme- 
diate causes  of  an  insurrection  in  Britain, 

vi.  43.  Principles  of  education  adopted 
by  him  for  Nero,  58.  Composes  the  fune- 
ral oration  of  Claudius,  65.  Opposes 
Agrippina,  68.  His  influence  over  Nero, 
70.  Grounds  for  imputing  the  murder  of 
Britannicus  to  his  advice,  77.  Strives  to 
make  Nero  popular  with  the  senate,  77. 
Disliked  by  Tacitus,  82.  He  and  Burihus 
authors  of  the  “Quinquennium  Neronis,” 
85.  Accused  of  counselling  Nero  to 
murder  his  mother,  100.  His  conduct  on 
Agrippina’s  death,  102-105.  His  philoso- 
phy alien  from  Roman  sentiments,  112. 
Death  of  his  colleague  Burrhus,  118.  At- 
tempts to  withdraw  from  public  life,  118. 
His  wealth,  43,  118.  Tempts  Nero,  125. 
Charge  of  conspiracy  against  him  rebut- 
ted, 125.  Again  attempts  to  withdraw 
into  privacy,  142.  Said  to  have  been  con- 
nected with  Piso’s  conspiracy,  and  put  to 
death  in  consequence,  146,  150.  Manner 
of  his  death,  150.  His  political  and  moral 
teaching,  230,  231.  Agreement  between 
his  writings  and  those  of  St.  Paul,  231. 
Inconsistency  between  his  teaching  and 
his  conduct,  232.  Compared  and  con- 
trasted with  Quintilian,  vii.  225. 

Senecio,  hunted  to  death,  vii.  147. 

Senones,  the,  defeated  at  the  battle  of  th< 
Vandimonian  lake,  i.  191.  Their  persona 
appearance,  228.  Refuse  obedience  t» 
Rome,  399.  Two  legions  left  by  Caesar  in 
their  country,  405. 

Scntinum,  battle  of,  i.  191. 

Sentius,  Cnasus,  chosen  proconsul  of  Syria, 
v.  70.  Compels  Piso  to  quit  Syria  for 
Rome,  73. 

Septicius  Clarus,  praetorian  prefect,  dis- 
graced by  Hadrian,  vii.  350. 

Septimius,  murders  his  old  comrado  Pom 
peius,  ii.  245,  246. 


660 


INDEX. 


Bequani,  a Gallic  tribe,  tbeir  territory,  i. 
214.  Complain  to  Home  of  the  tyranny 
of  the  iEdui,  233.  Invite  the  Suevi  to 
their  assistance,  throw  off  the  yoke  of  the 
.zEdui,  and  assume  the  leadership  of  the 
Gallic  tribes,  233,  234.  Oppressed  by  the 
Suevi,  237.  Induced  to  allow  the  Helvetii 
to  pass  through  their  territory,  245.  Their 
condition  after  Caesar's  first  campaign  in 
Gaul,  266.  Establishment  of  Roman  in- 
fluence over  them,  266.  Defeat  the  Lin- 
gones  under  Julius  Sabinus,  vi.  402. 

Serapis,  worship  of,  at  Alexandria,  vi.  381. 

Serenus,  his  punishment  for  seditious  in- 
trigues, v.  184. 

Sertorius,  history  of,  i.  38.  Insurrection  of 
the  Spanish  provinces  under  him,  38.  His 
defeat  and  flight,  39.  Succeeds  in  a new 
revolt  against  Home,  39.  Rejects  the 
proffered  alliance  of  Mithridates,  40.  His 
contest  with  Cn.  Pompeius,  40.  His  in- 
fluence over  the  Iberians,  41.  His  milk- 
white  hind,  41.  His  death,  42. 

Servreus,  a friend  of  Germanicus,  takes  part 
in  the  prosecution  of  Cn.  Piso,  v.  82. 

Servian  walls  of  Rome,  i.  18.  Described,  iv. 
379. 

Servilia,  mother  of  M.  Junius  Brutus,  her 
character,  i.  311.  Her  bold  counsel  to  the 
liberators,  iii.  70,  72. 

Servilia,  daughter  of  Soranus,  charges 
brought  agamst  her,  vi.  171.  Sentenced 
to  death,  172. 

Servilius  Isauricus,  his  unsuccessful  at- 
tempts to  reduce  the  Cilician  pirates,  i. 
48.  An  unsuccessful  candidate  for  the 
office  of  Pontifex  Maximus,  113.  Elected 
consul  with  Caesar,  ii.  184.  His  vigilance, 
269.  Proposed  for  Dolabella’s  successor 
in  Syria,  iii.  111.  Moves  a thanksgiving 
for  the  victory  of  Mutina,  120.  Becomes 
consul  a second  time,  178.  Refuses  to  join 
Antonius,  178. 

Servius,  mound  of,  in  Rome,  i.  18. 

Sestius,  L.,  appointed  consul  by  Augustus, 
iii.  341. 

Sestius,  P.,  Cilicia  placed  under  his  con- 
trol, ii.  86. 

Severianus,  prefect  of  Cappadocia,  slain  with 
the  loss  of  a legion,  vii.  455. 

Severus,  A.  Csecina.  See  Caecina. 

Severus , Cassius,  offends  Augustus  by  his 
licentious  writings,  v.  122. 

Severus,  Catilius,  appointed  prefect  of  Syria, 
vii.  331. 

Severus,  Julius,  his  tactics  against  the  Jews 
in  Palestine,  vii.  318. 

Sextilia,  mother  of  Yitellius,  her  noble  char- 
acter, vi.  342.  Dies  soon  after  he  is  de- 
clared imperator,  342.  Improbable  stories 
about  her  death,  343. 

Bextilius,  the  month,  its  name  changed  to 
Augustus,  iii.  373 ; iv.  190. 

Shammai,  his  prediction  respecting  Herod 
the  Great,  iii.  302. 

Sibylla  Cumana,  alleged  oracle  of,  forbid- 
ding an  armed  intervention  in  Egypt,  i.328. 

Sibylline  books,  officers  charged  with  the 
custody  of  the,  iii.  371.  Purged  and  the 
spurious  books  burnt  by  Augustus,  373. 

Sicarri,  or  secret  assassins,  of  the  Zealots,  in 
Jerusalem,  vi.  425. 


Sicily,  importance  of,  to  Rome,  i.  32.  Gov- 
ernment of,  entrusted  to  M.  Porcius 
Cato,  ii.  86.  Who  surrenders  it  to  the 
Caesarians  without  a blow,  121,  122. 
Seized  be  Sextus  Pompeius,  iii.  160.  Pop- 
ulation of,  at  the  commencement  of  the 
Roman  empire,  iv.  340.  Visited  by  Ha- 
drian, vii.  352. 

Sigambri,  a German  tribe,  utterly  extin- 
guished, vi.  38. 

Silanus,  Appius,  his  noble  family  and  con- 
nections, v.  408.  Incurs  the  hatred  of 
Messalina  and  is  put  to  death,  408. 

Silanus,  D.  Junius,  elected  consul,  i.  138. 
Defeated  by  the  hordes  of  the  Cimbri  and 
Teutones,  202. 

Silanus,  Decimus,  paramour  of  the  younger 
Julia,  v.  236  note  >. 

Silanus,  Lucius,  son  of  Appius  Silanus,  be- 
trothed to  Octavia,  daughter  of  the  empe- 
ror Claudius,  v.  438.  Disgraced  by  a con- 
spiracy formed  by  Agrippina,  439.  Com- 
mits suicide,  442. 

Silanus,  M,  Junius,  proconsul  of  Asia,  keeps 
Vonones,  king  of  Parthia,  in  custody,  v. 
52.  Removed  from  his  proconsulship  by 
Tiberius,  59.  Found  guilty  of  extortion 
and  banished,  128.  His  daughter  married 
to  Caius  Caesar,  236.  Put  to  death  by 
Caius,  303. 

Silanus,  M.  Junius,  nicknamed  u the  golden 
sheep 11  by  Caligula,  vi.  68.  Poisoned  by 
Agrippina's  command,  68. 

Silanus,  L.,  proscribed  by  Nero,  vi.  157. 
Slain  at  Barium,  158. 

Silius,  C.,  restrains  his  divisions  on  the 
Rhine  from  open  mutiny,  v.  22.  Makes  a 
demonstration  against  the  Chatti,  37. 
Crushes  a revolt  in  Gaul,  169.  Charged 
with  treason,  he  commits  suicide,  181. 
His  image  disgraced  by  Tiberius,  433. 

Silius,  C.,  advocates  the  reinforcement  of 
the  Lex  Cincia,  v.  420.  His  intrigue  and 
marriage  with  Messalina,  425-427,  432. 
His  fate  and  that  of  his  accomplices,  434. 

Silius  ltalicus,  consul  at  the  usurpation  of 
Galba,  vi.  293.  His  character  and  writ- 
ings compared  with  those  of  Lucan,  vii. 
222.  Cause  of  his  suicide,  257. 

Silius,  P„  his  adventures,  ii.  289.  In  the 
service  of  Bocchus,  king  of  Mauretania, 
289.  Advances  upon  Cirta,  the  capital  of 
Numidia,  292.  Routs  and  slays  Sabura, 
296.  Captures  Afranius  and  Faustus  Sul- 
la, 302. 

Silius,  P.,  succeeds  to  the  consulship,  iii. 
368.  Defeats  the  Communi  Vennoncs, 
Noricans,  and  Pannonians,  iv.  160.  Hands 
over  his  command  to  Drusus,  160. 

Silk,  cost  of,  in  Rome,  ii.  813. 

Silphium,  the  gum,  annual  tribute  of,  from 
the  Cyrenaica,  iv.  98. 

Silures,  a people  of  South  Wales,  attacked 
by  Ostorius  Scapula,  vi.  29,  35.  Over- 
thrown, 35,  et  seq . I efeat  the  Romans, 
39. 

Silver,  uses  of,  among  the  Greeks  and  Ro- 
mans, iv.  317. 

Similis,  praetorian  prefect  under  Hadrian, 
vii.  331. 

Simon,  son  of  Giora,  heads  a revolt  in  Jeru- 
salem, vi.  427.  Defeats  Cestius  at  ths 


INDEX. 


501 


pates,  427.  A chief  of  tne  zealots,  429. 
liis  position  in  the  defence  of  the  city,  dur- 
ing the  great  siege,  449, 450.  Takes  refuge 
underground,  467,  469.  His  fate,  470. 

Sinjar,  great  deseit  of,  i.  422. 

Sinope,"in  the  time  of  Augustus,  iv.  360. 

Sirmium,  Roman  post  ol,  attacked  by  the 
Pannonians,  iv.  247. 

Sisenna.  son  of  Gabinius,  his  incapacity  in 
Syria,  i.  352. 

Slaves  and  slavery  in  Rome,  i.  389.  Caesars 
attempts  to  counteract  the  increase  of 
slavery,  ii.  329.  Octavius’s  treatment  of 
slaves  taken  with  arms  in  their  hands,  iii. 
207.  Taxes  on  the  sale  and  enfranchise- 
ment of  slaves,  iii.  424.  Restrictions  of 
Augustus  on  manumission,  iv.  42.  Exten- 
sion of  the  franchise  by  manumission,  308. 
Effects  of  manumission  on  the  civic  fran- 
chise, 308-311.  Results  flowing  from  the 
institution  of  slavery,  vii.  4S0-4S2. 

Smyrna,  the  honour  of  making  Tiberius  its 
tutelar  deity  granted  to,  v.  194. 

Sohemus,  king  of  Iturea,  supports  Vespa- 
sian, vi.  350. 

Soldurii,  or  personal  servants  of  kings  of 
Gaul,  i.  295. 

Soli,  the  name  of,  changed  to  Pompeiopolis, 
i.  48. 

Soothsayers  expelled  from  Italy  by  Tiberius, 
v.  149. 

Sophists  in  Athens  in  the  time  of  Hadrian, 
vii.  361.  Character  of  their  teaching,  362. 
Celebrated  sophists,  363,  et  seq. 

Soranus,  Barea,  charged  with  treason  to 
Hero,  vi.  166,  169, 171.  His  daughter  Ser- 
vilia  included  in  the  prosecution,  171. 
Both  sentenced  to  death,  172. 

Sosigenes,  assists  Cie6ar  in  reforming  the 
calendar,  ii.  338. 

6osius,  C.,  prefect  of  Syria,  an  officer  of  An- 
tonius,  his  military  exploits,  iii.  219.  Be- 
comes consul,  and  pronounces  a vehement 
invective  against  Octavius,  238.  Aban- 
dons Rome,  and  repairs  to  Antonius,  240. 
His  unsuccessful  attack  on  Agrippa’s  gal- 
leys, 249.  Taken  prisoner  at  Actium,  but 
pardoned,  258.  Takes  Jerusalem,  305. 

Botiates,  a tribe  of  Aquitani,  defeated  by 
P.  Crassus,  i.  295. 

3pain,  the  first  province  acquired  by  the 
Romans  beyond  their  own  seas,i.  33.  In- 
surrection of  the  Spanish  provinces  under 
Sertorius,  38.  The  government  of  Fur- 
ther Spain  assumed  by  Caesar,  153.  State 
of  the  Roman  provinces  in  Spain  at  this 
period,  155.  Origin  of  the  name  Spain, 
154  note  '.  And  of  its  Iberian  inhabitants, 
212.  Metellos  Nepos  chosen  for  the  gov- 
ernment of  Spain,  828.  Spain  more  Ro- 
manized than  any  other  province,  ii.  113. 
The  Pompeian  lieutenants  in  Spain,  Var- 
ro.  Afranius,  and  Petreius,  130,  131.  Ex- 
tortions of  the  Caesarian  lieutenant  Q. 
Cassius  Longinus,  267.  Revival  of  the 
republican  cause  in  Spain,  205.  Continua- 
tion of  irregular  warfare  in  Spain,  iv.  60. 
Mineral  wealth  of  the  province,  61.  The 
Spanish  era,  62  note  •.  Endeavours  of  Sta- 
tilins  Taurus  to  quell  the  hostilities  of  the 
Iberians.  62.  Augustus  proceeds  to  take 
the  field  in  person,  62.  Reduction  of  the 


mountain  tribes  and  foundation  of  military 
colonies,  64.  Prolonged  residence  of  Au- 
gustus in  Spain,  65.  Renewed  outbreaks 
and  final  subjugation  of  the  Spaniards  by 
Agrippa,  66.  Political  organization  of  the 
Iberian  provinces,  69.  Population  of  Spain 
at  the  time  of  Augustus,  341.  Humber  of 
legions  stationed  in  Spain  in  the  time  of 
Tiberius,  v.  142.  Latin  rights  granted  to 
Spain  by  Vespasian,  vii.  23.  The  province 
visited  by  Hadrian,  350. 

Sparta,  favoured  by  Augustus  for  its  loyalty, 

iv.  103.  Its  condition  in  his  time,  354. 

Spartacus,  revolt  of  the  gladiators  under,  i. 

50.  Defeated  and  slain,  52. 

Spartianus,  his  character  as  a biographer, 
vii.  391. 

Spices,  Ac.,  from  the  East,  ancient  trade  in, 
in  the  Mediterranean,  iv.  315. 

Sporaces,  phylarch  of  Anthem usia,  submits 
to  Trajan,  vii.  304. 

Spurinna,  Vestricius,  holds  Placentia  for 
Otho  against  the  Vitellians,  vi.  332.  Spu- 
rinna as  an  example  of  the  more  refined 
and  intelligent  among  the  Roman  nobles, 
vii.  262. 

Stasanor,  the  Parthian  chieftain,  i.  408. 

Statilius  Corvinus,  his  abortive  attempt 
against  the  life  of  Claudius,  v.  411  note  'i. 

Statilius  Taurus,  commands  the  Cesarian 
fleet  in  the  war  against  Sextus  Pompeius, 
iii.  198.  Appointed  proconsul  of  Africa, 
208.  Gains  a victory  over  the  cavalry  of 
Antonius  at  Actium,  249.  Appointed  pre- 
fect of  Rome,  403;  iv.  146  Legatus  of 
Augustus  in  Spain,  62.  Endeavours  to 
quell  the  hostilities  of  the  Iberians,  62. 

Statilius  Taurus,  proconsul  of  Africa,  charged 
by  Agrippina  with  the  practice  of  magic, 

v.  451.  Commits  suicide,  452. 

Statius,  patronized  by  Domitian,  vii.  136. 
Kis  works  examined  and  compared  with 
Ovid,  vii.  228-231. 

Statius  Priscus,  prefect  in  Britain,  refuses 
the  offer  of  the  imperial  purple,  vii.  453. 
Replaced  by  Calpurnius  Agricola,  454. 
In  Cappadocia,  456.  Takes  Artaxata,  456. 

Stephanus,  freedman  of  Clemens,  slays  Do- 
mitian, vii.  154. 

Stoics,  fatal  influence  of  their  philosophy 
upon  the  principles  of  faith  and  morals, 
ii.  401.  Account  of  the  principles  of  the 
Stoics,  vi.  190.  The  attitude  of  opposi- 
tion to  government  first  assumed  by  the 
Stoics  under  the  empire,  190.  Principles 
on  which  Stoicism  is  to  be  judged,  191. 
Stoicism  attractive  to  the  noblest  charac- 
ters in  Rome,  192.  The  charge  against  it 
of  contumaciousness  and  seditiousness  not 
well  grounded,  193.  Political  innocence 
of  its  professois,  194.  The  Stoics  “ envel- 
oped, as  it  were,  in  the  atmosphere  of 
Christianity,”  233.  Aulus  Persius,  a 
teacher  of  Stoicism,  233.  The  Stoics  ban- 
ished from  Rome,  vii.  32.  Character  of 
the  Stoics  in  the  time  of  Trajan,  254. 
Suicide  not  a principle  of  the  Stoics,  255. 

Stonehenge  not  mentioned  by  Roman  writ- 
ers, vi.  10  note  >. 

Strado,  his  account  of  the  Gauls,  i.  211.  Ac- 
companies Petronius  to  Syene.  iv.  103. 

Streets  of  Rome,  in  the  time  of  Augustus, 


5G2 


INDEX. 


Iv.  405.  Trades  exercised  in  them,  406. 
Crowds  of  loungers  and  gazers,  407.  In- 
terruptions to  traffic,  407.  Paucity  of 
streets  in  Rome,  407. 

Street-games,  festival  of  the,  combined  with 
the  worship  of  Augustus,  iv.  26. 

Suburra,  the,  at  Rome,  character  of  its  pop- 
ulation, iv.  383. 

Buevi,  their  menacing  attitude  on  the  right 
bank  of  the  Rhine,  i.  232.  Invited  by 
the  Sequani  to  pass  into  Gaul,  233.  Op- 
press them  and  the  Aidui,  237,  254.  De- 
feated by  Caesar  and  expelled  from  Gaul, 
260-262.  Drive  the  Menapii  from  their 
territories,  366.  Cross  the  Rhine  into 
Gaul,  365.  Testimony  of  the  Usipetes  to 
their  valour,  368.  Their  encroachments 
on  the  territory  of  the  Ubii,  368.  Pur- 
sued by  Gesar  to  the  Hercynian  forests, 
399. 

Suessiones,  a Belgic  tribe,  head  a confed- 
eracy of  tribes  against  the  Roman  in- 
vaders, i.  267.  Reduced  by  Caesar,  270: 
ii.  36. 

Suetonius  Lenis,  father  of  the  historian, 
serves  under  Otho.  vi.  333  note 

Suetonius,  C.,  Tranquillus,  his  “ Lives  of  the 
Caesars”  characterized,  vii.  242, 248.  Sup- 
ply the  place  of  history,  242.  Reasons 
for  their  preservation,  242.  Disgraced 
by  Hadrian  for  his  disrespect  to  the  em- 
press, 350. 

Suetonius  Panllinus,  the  first  Roman  who 
crossed  the  Atlas,  v.  378.  Routs  the 
Britons  in  Anglesey,  vi.  42  Defeats  the 
Iceni,  is  recalled,  46-51. 

Suetonius,  commands  part  of  Otho’s  army, 
vi.  329.  At  the  battle  of  Bedriacum,  334. 

Suicide,  prevalence  of,  at  Rome  in  the  time 
of  Trajan,  vii.  255.  Among  women,  258. 
Not  the  result  of  speculative  opinions, 
nor  practised  as  an  escape  from  tyranny, 
256-260. 

Suilius,  a delator,  employed  by  Messalina  to 
accuse  Valerius  Asiaticus,  v.  416.  Ilis 
success  as  an  informer,  419.  Defends  the 
practice  of  fees  to  delators,  420. 

Bulla,  Cornelius,  the  first  to  decree  a pro- 
scription by  law,  i.  31  note.  Oligarchical 
reaction  under  him,  31.  Effects  of  his  re- 
tirement on  the  provincials,  37.  His  vic- 
tories in  Macedonia  and  Asia  Minor,  44. 
His  massacres  and  proscription,  54.  His 
legislation  in  the  interest  of  the  oligarchy, 
59.  His  death,  61.  Fixes  the  number  of 
the  senate  at  six  hundred,  62.  Divines  the 
character  of  Cn.  Pompeius,  and  distrusts 
him,  69.  Requires  C.  Julius  Caesar  to  di- 
vorce his  wife  Cornelia,  93.  Warns  his 
partisans  against  Caesar,  94.  His  resigna- 
tion of  the  dictatorship  in  675  and  death 
leave  the  oligarchy  without  any  acknowl- 
edged leader,  61.  His  system  of  govern- 
ment a political  anachronism,  iv.  9. 

Sulla,  Faustus,  son  of  the  dictator,  his 
wealth,  i.  110.  Retreats  before  Caesar,  ii. 
102.  At  Patr*  with  the  defeated  Pom- 
peians, 283.  His  death,  302, 303. 

Bulla,  Faustus  Cornelius,  husband  of  Anto- 
nia, and  son-in-law  of  Claudius,  chosen 
consul,  v 221.  Put  to  death  by  Nero,  vi. 
81, 120. 


Sulpicius  Rufus,  Servins,  the  jurist,  an  un- 
successful candidate  for  the  consulship,  i. 
133.  Prosecutes  Murena  for  bribery,  133. 
Elected  consul,  ii.  51.  Abets  the  presump- 
tion of  Juba,  king  of  Numidia,  168.  Se  jt 
as  a commissioner  to  negotiate  with  An- 
tonius,  iii.  104.  His  death  on  his  jour- 
ney, 106.  His  vast  legal  knowledge  and 
works,  iv.  44. 

Sumptuary  laws,  enactment  of,  during  the 
consulship  of  Pompeius  and  Crassus,  t, 
346.  Caisar’s  sumptuary  laws,  ii.  324. 

Superstitions,  oriental,  introduced  into 
Rome,  ii.  405.  Proscribed,  but  continue  to 
reappear,  407. 

Supper,  a Roman,  described,  iv.  423.  Coarse- 
ness of  the  luxury  of  the  Roman  table, 
425.  The  ordering  of  a Roman  supper, 
425.  Custom  of  recitation  at  supper,  428. 

Sura,  Licinius,  conspires  against  Trajan,  vii. 
213. 

Sura,  Palfurius,  struck  off  the  roll  of  the 
senate,  but  restored,  vii.  130. 

Surenas,  the  Parthian  general,  the  word 
probably  a title,  not  a personal  name,  de- 
scription of,  i.  409  note  > ; 421  note  *.  His 
position  in  the  state,  421.  Besieges  Car- 
rhae;  his  stratagem  to  engage  Crassus  in 
conference,  427.  Seizes  the  proconsul  and 
his  staff,  426.  Sends  the  head  and  hand 
of  Crassus  to  Orodes,  428.  His  mock  tri- 
umph, 428. 

Surveys  of  the  empire,  iv.  325. 

Syene,  garrison  of  Romans  at,  iii.  280. 

Syllieus,  minister  of  the  Nabathican  king 
Obodas,  conducts  the  expedition  of  ..Elius 
Gallus  into  Arabia,  iv.  97.  Charged  with 
treachery,  97,  99. 

Symeon,  bishop  of  Jerusalem,  martyrdom 
of,  vii.  294  note  2. 

Synnada,  condition  of,  in  the  time  of  Au- 
gustus, iv.  360. 

Syracuse,  Roman  colony  planted  by  Augus- 
tus in,  iv.  103. 

Syria,  government  of,  coveted  by  the  con- 
suls, i.  35.  The  kingdom  reduced  to  a 
Roman  province  by  Pompeius,  138;  iv. 
112.  The  proconsulate  assigned  by  P. 
Clodius  to  Gabinius,  i.  305.  Who  is  suc- 
ceeded by  Crassus,  353.  Extent  of  tho 
province  of  Syria  at  this  period,  411. 
Power  of  Cassius  in  the  province,  iii.  159. 
Exactions  of  Antoni  us,  173.  Organization 
of  the  province  by  Augustus,  iv.  112. 
Legions  stationed  in  Syria  in  the  reign  of 
Tiberius,  v.  142.  The  Syrian  elemental 
worship  attractive  to  the  lower  orders  cf 
women  in  Rome,  vi.  199-202.  List  of  the 
proconsuls  in  Syria,  261.  Character  of  its 
governors  and  of  their  government,  262, 
263.  Annexation  of  Judea  to  the  province 
of  Syria,  264.  The  command  in  Syria  as- 
sumed by  the  emperor  Yerus,  vii.  454. 
Reverses  sustained  by  him,  followed  by 
splendid  victories,  455. 

ABULARITJM  of  Rome,  i.  136  note 
Tacfarinas,  the  African  warrior,  sketch 
of  his  career,  v.  56.  Defeated  by  Furius 
Camillus,  57.  Renews  his  incursions  into 
the  borders  of  the  African  province,  166 
Defeated  and  commits  suicide,  185. 


INDEX. 


563 


Tacitus,  his  review  of  the  position  of  Octa- 
vius after  the  close  of  the  civil  wars,  iii. 
810.  His  pictures  of  Teutonic  freedom,  v. 
45,  46.  His  “Histories”  more  to  be  re- 
lied on  than  his  “Annals,”  vi.  372.  Mis- 
appreciates  the  sources  of  Jewish  history, 
439.  Patronized  by  Domitian,  vii.  136. 
Compared  with  Livy  and  Lucan,  233.  His 
reason  for  fixing  the  limits  of  his  history 
considered,  235.  His  prepossession  in 
favour  of  Trajan,  237.  Certain  character- 
istics of  his  unfairness  to  the  earlier  Ca3- 
sars,  238.  His  satirical  misrepresentation 
of  his  own  times,  240.  His  writings  bio- 
graphical rather  than  historical,  241.  His 
manliness,  273.  Comparison  between  him 
and  Juvenal,  274.  Increase  of  bitterness 
with  his  years,  275. 

Taranis,  the  Gallic  Jupiter,  i.  223.  Identi- 
fied with  Jove  the  Thunderer,  iv.  S4. 

Tarcondimotus  L,  a Cilician  chief,  joins  the 
Pompeians  in  the  civil  wrar,  ii.  188.  Slain 
at  Actium,  iv.  109.  Holds  the  Cilician  and 
Syrian  gates,  109. 

Tarcondimotus  II.,  placed  on  the  throne  of 
Cilicia  by  Augustus,  iv.  109. 

Tarentum,  treaty  o£  between  Octavius  and 
Antonius,  iii.  197. 

Tarichea,  stormed  by  Yespasian,  vi.  437. 
His  atrocity  there,  437. 

Tarsus,  city  of,  subdued  by  Cassius,  iii.  159. 

Tarraco,  temple  of  Augustus  at,  restored  by 
Hadrian,  vii.  351. 

Tarusates,  an  Aquitanian  tribe,  defeated  by 
P.  Crassus,  i.  296. 

Tasgetius,  massacred  by  the  Carnutes,  i. 
391. 

Taurini,  their  dwelling-place,  iv.  87.  Foun- 
dation by  Augusta  of  the  Taurini  (Turin), 
88. 

Taurisci,  war  of  Octavius  with  the,  iii.  232. 

Taxation,  jealousy  of,  of  the  Romans,  v.  344. 
Caius  alienates  the  populace  by  his  new 
and  increased  taxation,  344.  Nero’s  pro- 
posal to  abolish  the  whole  system  of  indi- 
rect taxation,  vi.  88. 

Tectosages,  a Belgic  tribe,  defeated  by  the 
Romans,  i.  206.  ~ Their  incursions  into  the 
south  of  Gaul,  227. 

Telephus,  the  slave,  his  attempt  on  the  life 
of  Augustus,  iv.  256. 

Temples,  etfect  of  the  plunder  of,  upon  the 
circulation  of  money,  iii  317.  The  tem- 
ples the  banks  of  the  ancient  world,  318. 
Restoration  of  the  temples  by  Augustus, 
iv.  24,  27.  The  temple  architecture  of 
Rome,  391.  The  Roman  principle  of  dec- 
orating not  the  exterior  of  their  temples, 
but  the  interior  of  their  dwellings,  vii. 
267. 

Tenchthcri,  a German  tribe,  invade  Bel- 
gium, L 366.  Subdued  by  Drusus,  iv. 
266. 

Tentyra  and  Ombi,  the  bloody  quarrel  of, 
vii.  375. 

Terontia,  wife  of  Cicero,  her  high  spirit,  i. 
819. 

Terentia,  or  Terentilla,  wife  of  Maecenas, 
her  character,  iv.  154.  Her  pow’er  over 
her  husband,  154.  Her  amour  with  Au 
gustus,  154,  156. 

Terminus,  the  god,  worship  of,  iv.  27.  Sys- 


tem of  augural  limitation  and  the  conse- 
cration of  boundaries,  28. 

Teutates,  Mercurius  worshipped  by  the  Gal- 
lic tribes  under  the  name  of,  i.  223.  Ad- 
mitted to  the  citizenship  of  the  Roman 
Olympus,  iv.  84. 

Teutoberg,  forest  of  iv.  272. 

Teutonea  the,  origin  and  great  migration  of, 
i.  198-201.  They  defeat  the"  Romans, 
overrun  Gaul,  and  are  annihilated  at 
Aqufe  Sextiae,  201-204.  Their  enmity  to 
the  Celtic  tribes,  227.  Incursions  of  some 
of  the  tribes  into  Gaul,  231.  Supersti 
tious  veneration  paid  by  the  ancient  Ger- 
mans to  women,  260.  Driven  out  of  Gaul 
by  Caesar,  261.  Invasion  of  Belgium  by 
German  tribes,  366.  The  Eburones  plun- 
dered by  a body  of  Germans,  403.  Who 
attack  the  Roman  station  at  Aduatuca, 
but  are  defeated,  403,  404.  Chastised  by 
Marcus  Yinicius,  iv.  71.  Cross  the  lower 
Rhine  and  defeat  Lollius,  156.  See  also 
Germany. 

Thames,  the  river,  forded  by  Caesar,  i.  3S8. 

Thapsus,  occupied  by  Yirgilius,  ii.  294.  In- 
vested by  Caesar,  2*94.  Scipio  defeated  by 
Caesar  at  the  battle  uf,  295.  Sum  exacted 
by  Caesar  from  the  citizens,  303. 

Thasos,  the  remnant  of  the  republicans  at, 
iii.  172. 

Theatre  of  Augustus,  iv.  409. 

of  Balbus,  iv.  409. 

of  Pompeius,  opening  of  the,  i.  344. 

Its  extent,  iv.  403,  409. 

of  Marcellus,  iv.  410.  Its  extent, 

403. 

Theatrical  exhibitions  of  the  Romans,  iv. 
410.  Pantomime,  410.  Spectacles,  411. 
Tiberius’s  control  over  the  players,  v.  149. 
Edict  of  Domitian  against  the  mimes, 
vii.  109. 

Theodotus,  the  rhetorician,  preceptor  to 
Ptolemaeus  XII.,  ii.  244.  Takes  Pom- 
peius’s  head  to  Caesar,  254. 

Theogenes  the  soothsayer,  and  Octavius, 
iii.  60. 

Thermus,  the  tribune,  stops  the  mouth  of 
Nepos,  i.  142.  Abandons  his  post  at  Igu- 
vium,  ii.  100.  Retreats  to  Apulia,  102. 
Joins  Sextus  Pompeius,  but  finally  aban- 
dons him,  iii.  204. 

Thermae  in  Rome.  See  Baths. 

Theudas,  a false  Christ,  or  brigand,  in  Judea, 
vi.  420. 

Tholomeus,  a false  Christ,  in  Judea,  vi.  420. 

Thoranius,  his  proscription  and  murder, 
iii.  144. 

Thrace,  progress  of  the  Roman  arms  in,  in 
the  time  of  Augustus,  iv.  91.  Revolt  in, 
extinguished  by  L.  Piso,  18S.  Governed 
by  native  kings,  v.  142,  268.  Quarrel  in 
the  royal  family,  and  occupation  of  part 
of  the  country  by  a Roman  officer,  268. 
Deprived  of  the  autonomy  of  the  remain- 
der by  Yespasian,  vii.  28.* 

Thrasea,  Pastas,  charges  brought  against 
him,  vi.  166.  His  character,  166.  Frivo- 
lous nature  of  the  charges,  167.  Consults 
with  his  friends  the  course  he  should 
adopt,  169.  Proceedings  against  him  in 
the  senate,  170.  His  death,  172. 

Thrasyllus,  the  astrologer,  his  post  in  the 


564 


INDEX. 


household  of  Tiberius  at  Rhodes,  iv. 
234. 

Thusnelda,  wife  of  Arminias.  Delivered 
by  her  lather  Segestes  as  a hostage  to  the 
Homans,  and  sent  to  Ravenna,  v.  32.  Led 
in  triumph  by  Germanicus,  48. 

7 hysdrui-:,  siege  of,  by  the  Ca?sarians,  ii.  296. 

' iberias,  surrenders 'to  Vespasian,  vi.  437. 
Establishment  of  the  Jewish  schools  at, 
vii.  292,  314.  Preservation  of  the  Jewish 
nationality  by  the  teaching  of  the  Jewish 
doctors  at,  314. 

Tiberius  Nero,  his  birth  and  parentage,  iii. 
218;  iv.  125.  Qusestor,  iii.  338;  iv.  128. 
Accuses  Murena  and  Ca?pio  of  conspiracy, 
iii.  367.  Annexes  Ma?sia  to  Illyricum,  iv. 
89.  Compels  the  Parthians  to  restore  the 
standards  of  Crassus,  116.  His  campaign 
against  the  Vindelicians,  160.  Consul,  161. 
His  marriage  with  Vipsania,  170.  Be- 
trothed to  Julia,  but  despatched  before 
marriage  to  Pannonia,  170.  His  character 
in  early  life,  171-173.  His  marriage  with 
Julia,  1S2.  Crosses  the  Rhine  and  ad- 
vances into  Germany,  189,  190.  Receives 
the  tribunitian  power  for  five  years,  206. 
Retires  dissatisfied  to  Rhodes,  207,  208. 
Effects  of  his  retirement,  213.  Interview 
with  Caius  Cassar.  214.  Recalled  to  Rome, 
and  adopted  into  the  Julian  family,  221. 
Exhibited  before  the  Romans  as  the  part- 
ner of  Augustus,  221.  His  gloomy  pros- 
pects at  Rhodes,  233.  Addicts  himself  to 
astrology,  2)34.  On  his  return  from  Rhodes, 
abstains  from  all  public  affairs,  235.  In- 
troduces his  son  Drusus  to  the  citizens  in 
the  forum,  236.  Composes  an  elegy  on 
the  death  of  Lucius  Ca?sar,  236.  His 
campaigns  in  Germany,  237.  His  cam- 
aign  against  Moroboduus,  245,  246.  Ex- 
ibits  games  in  honour  of  Drusus,  250. 
Completes  the  subjugation  of  the  Panno- 
nians,  255.  The  honours  of  a triumph 
granted  to  him,  265.  Goes  to  the  Rhine, 

276.  His  bloodless  campaign  in  Germany, 

277.  Assured  of  succession  to  the  empire, 
2S0.  Completes  the  lustrum  and  resumes 
the  command  in  Illyricum,  286.  Sum- 
moned to  the  death-bed  of  Augustus,  2S7. 
Readiness  of  the  Romans  to  acquiesce  in 
his  succession  to  the  empire,  v.  8.  His 
self-distrust,  9, 26.  Announcement  of  the 
death  of  Augustus,  10.  Possible  compet- 
itors already  designated  by  Augustus,  10. 
Rumoured  assassination  of  Agrippa  Pos- 
tumus,  11.  Tiberius  succeeds  to  the  em- 
pire, 12.  Pronounces  the  funeral  oration 
over  the  body  of  Augustus,  15.  His  first 
address  to  the  senate,  16.  All  the  func- 
tions of  empire  left  by  tacit  understanding 
in  his  hands,  17.  Abolishes  the  last  poli- 
tical privileges  of  the  people,  17.  Mutiny 
of  the  legions  in  Pannonia  and  on  the 
Rhine,  18,  20.  His  jealousy  of  the  popu- 
larity of  Germanicus,  26,  36.  Determines 
to  employ  the  discontented  soldiers,  26. 
llis  artifice  in  dealing  with  them,  27.  His 
policy  in  the  senate,  29.  Death  of  his 
wife  Julia,  29.  His  murmurs  at  the 
6lender  results  of  the  campaigns  in  Ger- 
many, 36  The  Romans  offended  at  his 
jealousy,  36.  Recalls  his  nephew  Ger- 


manicus to  Rome,  47.  And  sends  him  on 
a mission  to  the  East,  50.  His  conduct 
on  the  death  of  Germanicus,  74-77.  Checks 
the  flow  of  public  feeling,  75.  Opens  the 
trial  of  Piso  with  a speech,  SI.  Mitigates 
the  sentence  of  the  senate  on  Piso,  86. 
Tiberius  free  from  all  suspicion  in  regard 
to  the  death  of  Germanicus,  107.  In- 
trigues of  Libo  Drusus,  8S.  His  fear  of 
the  senate  and  consequent  policy,  29,  91. 
His  apprehensions  relieved  by  the  deaths 
of  Germanicus  and  Piso,  91.  Secretly 
influenced  by  Livia  and  Sejanus,  37,  92, 
163.  Logical  character  of  his  policy,  97. 
Has  not  a select  council,  but  originates 
his  own  measures,  106  Rejects  the  pe- 
tition of  a pauper  senator,  113.  His  con- 
duct with  regard  to  libels,  123.  lnjustico 
he  has  done  his  own  reputation,  129, 130. 
ILncourages  criminal  informers,  130,  186, 
201.  Contemporary  opinion  favourable 
to  him,  140, 185.  His  military,  civil,  and 
provincial  government,  142-152.  Immo- 
rality ascribed  to  him,  155.  His  simple 
habits,  and  disregard  of  money,  156,  158. 
His  show  of  deference  to  the  senate,  158. 
Ilis  defects  of  temper  and  demeanour,  159. 
Comparison  between  Augustus  and  Tibe- 
rius, 162.  His  jealousy  not  alarmed  by 
the  inferior  origin  and  talents  of  Sejanus, 
163.  Scions  of  the  imperial  family,  164. 
Associates  himself  with  his  son  Drusus  in 
the  consulship,  164.  Renewed  disturb- 
ances in  Africa  and  in  Gaul,  166.  The 
tribunitian  power  conferred  upon  Drusus 
in  conjunction  with  the  emperor,  171. 
His  confidence  in  Sejanus,  175.  His  son 
Drusus  poisoned  by  Sejanus,  176.  His 
demeanour  on  the  death  of  Drusus,  177. 
His  pretended  offer  to  restore  the  repub- 
lic, 178.  Jealousy  of  the  family  of  Ger- 
manicus, 179.  Deterioration  of  his  prin- 
cipate  from  a.d.  23,  ISO.  His  motives  lor 
checking  the  delators,  184.  Rejects  the 
suit  of  Sejanus  for  Livilla,  187.  Quarrels 
with  Agrippina,  190.  Eleven  cities  of 
Asia  contend  for  the  honour  of  making 
Tiberius  their  tutular  deity,  198.  Medi- 
tates retiring  from  the  city,  194.  His 
motives  for  quitting  Rome,  195.  Does 
not  abandon  public  affairs  in  his  retire- 
ment, 199.  Retires  to  Caprese,  203.  His 
life  there,  207.  Further  deterioration  of 
his  government.  208.  Death  of  his  mother, 
210.  Complains  to  the  senate  of  Agrippina 
and  her  son  Nero,  214.  Banishes  Agrip- 
pina and  her  sons,  215.  Prosecutes  the 
friends  of  Livia,  216.  His  cruelty  to  Asi- 
nius  Gallus,  218.  His  procrastination  and 
irresolution,  219.  His  measures  for  the 
destruction  of  Sejanus,  223,  227.  Refuses 
the  title  of  Pater  Patria?,  228.  His  intense 
anxiety,  228.  Takes  vengeance  for  the 
murder  of  Drusus,  231,  238.  Quits  Ca- 
prea*  and  approaches  Rome,  231.  But 
returns  to  Caprea?,  232.  Licentiousness 
ascribed  to  him,  233.  Cruelty  to  Agrip- 
pina and  her  son  Drusus,  235-238.  His 
despair  and  apparent  insanity,  240.  Re- 
flection on  his  general  policy,  244.  Ques- 
tion of  the  succession  to  the  empire,  246. 
Appoints  Caius  and  Tiberius  Gemellus 


INDEX, 


565 


his  private  heirs,  but  leaves  the  succession 
undetermined,  250,  254.  Ilia  end  visibly 
approaching,  252.  Power  of  the  crafty 
Macro,  253.  Anecdote  told  of  Tiberius  by 
Josephus,  254.  His  last  days  and  death, 
255-25S.  His  character,  25S.  Judgment 
of  the  Romans  on  his  character,  259. 
Baneful  influence  of  his  latter  years  on 
society  and  literature:  a reign  of  terror, 
261.  General  state  of  peace  and  security 
of  the  provinces  under  him,  263-265.  Ex- 
pressions of  indignation  of  the  people  on 
nis  death,  284.  His  will  annulled  by  the  sen- 
ate, 285.  His  obsequies  conducted  by  Caius, 
2ST.  Amount  of  treasure  accumulated  by 
him  during  his  reign,  28S. 

Tiberius,  Alexander,  procurator  of  Judea,  a 
renegade  from  Judaism,  vi.  421.  Prefect 
of  Egypt,  and  joins  the  party  of  Vespa- 
sian. 438. 

Tiberius  Gemellus,  grandson  of  the  emperor 
Tiberius,  v.  249.  Appointed  co-heir  of 
the  emperor’s  private  fortune,  250.  Put  to 
death  by  the  emperor  Caius,  298. 

Tibullus,  Albius,  confiscation  of  his  patri- 
mony, iii.  17T ; iv.  460.  His  poetry,  461. 

Ticinum,  military  disturbance  at,  vi.  343, 
344. 

Tigellinus,  praetorian  prefect  and  minister 
of  Nero,  shares  in  his  excesses,  vi.  118. 
His  fatal  influence  over  the  emperor,  119. 
His  victims,  Rubellius  Plancus  and  Cor- 
nelius Sulla,  120.  Presides  at  the  exami- 
nation of  Octavia,  123.  His  infamous  de- 
vices for  the  emperor’s  pleasures,  127. 
His  HSmilian  Gardens,  130.  Triumphal 
statue  awarded  to  him,  151.  Sacrifices 
Petronius  to  his  jealousy,  163.  Head  de- 
manded by  the  populace  after  Nero’s 
death,  escapes  through  the  intercession 
of  Vinius,  302. 

Tigurini,  a Helvetian  tribe,  defeated  by  Cag- 
sar,  i.  247. 

Tinnius  Rufus,  baffled  by  the  Jews  in  Pal- 
estine, vii.  318. 

Tiri  dates,  seizes  the  throne  of  Parthia,  iii. 
281. 

Tiridates,  son  of  Phraates,  chosen  king  of 
Armenia,  but  subsequently  dethroned  v. 
268;  vi.  265.  Does  homage  to  Nero,  vi. 
268. 

Tiro,  M.  Tullius,  his  life  of  Cicero,  iii.  148. 
Cicero’s  favourite  slave,  iv.  309. 

Titianus,  brother  of  Otho,  named  consul,  vi. 
326.  Placed  in  command  of  the  army  at 
the  battle  of  Bedriacum,  333.  Pardoned 
by  Vitellius,  341. 

Titius,  an  Antonine  officer,  puts  Sextus 
Pompeius  to  death,  iii,  205.  Deserts  from 
Antonins  to  Octavius  and  divulges  An- 
tonius’s  will,  241.  Gains  a victory  over 
Antonius’s  cavalry,  249. 

Iltus,  Flavius  Sabinus  Vespasianus.  charged 
by  his  father  with  the  conduct  of  affairs  in 
Judea,  vi.  351.  Consul  with  his  father, 
376.  Enamoured  of  Berenice,  sister  of 
Agnppa,  436 ; vii.  43.  Conducts  an  army 
against  Jerusalem,  454.  His  operations 
against  the  outer  wall,  455.  Draws  a line 
of  circumvallation  round  the  city,  457. 
Captures  the  fortress  Antonia,  460.  De- 
struction of  the  temple,  465.  Conclusion 


of  the  Jewish  war,  471.  Titus  returns  to 
Rome  and  triumphs  with  his  father,  471. 
Erection  of  the  arch  of  Titus,  vii.  33.  And 
of  his  baths,  33,  34.  Contends  in  a sham 
fight  wiih  Caecina,  36.  Assumes  the  em- 
pire on  the  death  of  his  father,  42.  His 
early  life  and  character,  42,  43.  Favour 
with  which  he  was  regarded  by  the  Ro- 
mans, 46.  Declares  his  brother  Domitian 
the  partner  of  his  empire,  47.  He  com- 
bines the  suffrages,  both  of  the  nobles  and 
of  the  people,  47.  Disasters  of  his  reign, 
49.  Dedicates  the  Colosseum,  50.  His 
illness  and  death,  50.  View  of  his 
character  taken  by  Christians  and  Jews, 
51. 

Togodumnus,  son  of  Cunobelinus,  worsted 
by  Aulus  Plautius,  vi.  22.  Slain,  23. 

Tigranes,  king  of  Armenia,  defeated  by 
Pompeius,  il  137. 

Tigranes,  placed  by  Corbulo  on  the  throne 
of  Armenia,  vi.  265. 

Tolosa,  Roman  colony  at,  i.  33,  208.  The 
city  sacked  by  Cjvpio,  206  note. 

Tombs  by  the  sides  of  the  roads  approach- 
ing Rome,  iv.  367. 

Trade  combinations,  Trajan’s  jealousy  o£ 
vii.  213. 

Trajan,  father  of  the  emperor,  a Spaniard  of 
Italica,  commands  the  10th  legion  at  Jop- 
pa, proconsul  of  Asia,  vii.  172. 

Trajan,  M.  Ulpius,  his  origin  and  early 
career,  vii.  171, 172.  His  moderation  in 
command,  174.  His  bridge  across  the  Rhine 
at  Mainz,  176.  Commences  a rampart 
from  the  Rhine  to  the  Danube,  117. 
Adopted  by  Nerva,  168.  His  demeanour 
on  entering  Rome,  178.  Magnanimity  of 
his  wife  and  sister,  178.  Receives  the 
title  of  Optimns,  ISO.  His  first  Dacian 
campaign,  181,  185.  Records  it  on  the 
Trajan  column,  187.  His  triumph  and 
personal  habits,  1S7.  His  second  expedi- 
tion to  Dacia,  1S9.  His  stone  bridge  over 
the  Danube,  191.  Defeats  Decebalus  and 
makes  Dacia  a province,  193-197.  Tra- 
jan’s forum  and  column,  197-202.  His 
architectural  works  in  the  city,  and  in  the 
provinces,  204-206.  His  provincial  ad- 
ministration, 206.  His  economical  meas- 
ures and  charitable  institutions,  208,  209. 
His  measures  for  the  special  benefit  of 
Italy  and  for  maintaining  the  dignity  of  the 
senate,  211,  212.  Pledges  himself  never 
to  take  the  life  of  a senator,  213.  His  jeal 
ousy  of  guilds,  213,  Splendour  and  econ- 
omy combined  in  his  administration, 
214.  His  legislation,  215.  His  personal 
qualities,  figure  and  countenance,  216-219. 
His  correspondence  with  Pliny  about  the 
Christians,  2S9-292.  Tradition  of  the 
church  of  his  condemnation  of  Ignatius, 
293.  His  presence  demanded  in  the  East, 
296.  Declares  Armenia  the  vassal  of 
Rome,  298.  Reaches  Antioch,  299.  His 
escape  during  the  great  earthquake  there, 
299.  His  expedition  into  Armenia,  300 
His  cruel  treatment  of  Parthamasiris, 
301-303.  Annexes  both  Armenias  to  the 
empire,  379.  Crosses  the  Tigris  and  ere* 
ates  the  new  province  of  Assyria,  305, 
The  title  of  Parthicus  bestowed  on  him. 


566 


INDEX. 


806.  Takes  Ctesiphon,  launches  on  the 
Persian  gulf,  and  subdues  the  Partbians, 
806-308.  Repulsed  before  A.tra,  308.  llis 
sickness  and  death  at  Selinus,  311.  For- 
tunate in  the  moment  of  his  death,  813. 
His  apotheosis  at  Rome,  331.  His  eastern 
conquests  abandoned  by  Hadrian,  332. 
Pliny’s  panegyric  on  him,  439. 

Transtiberine  quarter  of  Rome,  described, 
iv.  3S4. 

Travelling,  rate  of,  in  the  time  of  Augustus, 
iv.  321-323.  Frequency  of  night  travel- 
ling, 866. 

Treason,  law  of,  or  “majestas,”  iii.  364. 

Trebellius  Maximus,  his  prefecture  in  Bri- 
tain, vii.  69. 

Trebonius,  C.,  serves  under  Caesar  in  Gaul, 
i.  264.  His  law  conferring  provinces  on 
Pompeius  and  Crassus,  341.  His  law  for 
the  prolongation  of  Cajsar’s  command  in 
Gaul,  842,  343.  His  violence,  421.  Joins 
Caesar  under  the  walls  of  Rome,  ii.  128. 
Appointed  to  the  command  of  the  land 
forces  for  besieging  Massilia,  130.  His 
immense  rampart  on  the  land  side  of  the 
city,  156.  Made  praetor  of  Rome,  201. 
And  propraetor  of  Further  Spain,  268.  Ex- 
pelled from  his  government  by  the  repub- 
lican insurgents,  306.  Joins  the  conspiracy 
against  Caesar’s  life,  374.  Obtains  the 
government  of  Asia,  iii.  31.  Establishes 
himself  there,  94.  Seized  and  murdered 
by  Dolabella,  110. 

Treves,  colony  of,  founded  by  Claudius,  v. 
379. 

Treviri.  a Belgic  tribe,  i.  225.  Defeated  by 
Labienus,  399.  Two  of  Caesar’s  legions 
stationed  in  their  country,  405.  Again 
defeated  by  Labienus,  ii.  36.  Defeated  by 
Nonius  Gallus,  iv.  70.  In  revolt  agairst 
Rome,  vi.  403.  And  again  defeated,  405. 
Operations  of  Cerealis  in  their  country, 
406, 407. 

Tribunes,  their  power  abridged  by  Sulla,  i. 
81.  The  potest  a s tribunitia , iii.  360. 
The  tribunitian  power  conferred  upon 
Augustus,  360.  Who  affects  the  inviola- 
bility of  the  emperor,  361.  Appellate  ju- 
risdiction of  the  tribunes,  862. 

Tributum,  the,  as  a source  of  public  reve- 
nue, iii.  493. 

Trinobantes,  a British  tribe,  submit  to  Cae- 
sar, i.  358.  Their  coinage,  vi  17.  Their 
power,  18.  Defeated  by  Claudius,  25. 

Trio,  Fulcinius,  lodges  on  impeachment 
against  Piso,  v.  79.  His  speech  for  the 
rosecution,  82.  The  emperor’s  caution  to 
im,  87.  Prosecutes  Libo  Drusus,  90. 
Chosen  consul,  222. 

• Tristia ” of  Ovid,  remarks  on  the,  iv. 
464. 

Triumph,  mode  of  conducting  a,  iii.  346. 

Triumvirate,  formation  of  the  First,  i.  168. 
Reflections  upon  the  character  of  this 
league,  169.  Formation  of  the  Second,  iii. 
138. 

Troy,  game  of,  exhibited  by  Augustus,  iv. 
144.  And  by  Claudius,  v.  421. 

Tubero,  entrusted  by  the  senate  with  the 
care  of  Africa,  ii.  86. 

Tullia,  daughter  of  Cicero,  divorced  from  P. 
Dolabella,  ii.  362.  Her  death,  362 


“ Turbot,  council  of  the,”  vii.  140. 

Turones,  a Gallic  tribe,  i.  215.  Compelled 
to  submit  to  the  Romans,  282.  Revolt, 
but  are  reduced,  v.  167,  168. 

Turpilianus,  Petronis,  has  the  command  of 
the  legion  in  Britain,  vi.  50.  Put  to  death 
by  Galba,  295. 

Turulius,  in  arms  against  the  triumvirs,  iii. 
173. 

Tusculum,  Cicero’s  villa  at,  described,  i 
805.  Favourite  residence  of  Roman  no- 
bles, 304. 

Tutor,  Julius,  a Trevirian,  joins  a con- 
spiracy to  liberate  Gaul,  vi.  400.  Defeat- 
ed, 405. 

Tyre,  complaint  of  the  citizens  of,  of  the 
extortions  of  Gabinius’  publicani,  i.  354. 
The  temple  of  Melcarth  at,  plundered  by 
Caesar,  ii.  276. 

BII,  a German  tribe,  slaughter  the  fugi- 
tive Suevi,  i.  262.  Their  territory,  262 
'note'1.  Encroachments  of  the  Suevi  on 
their  territory,  368.  Transplanted  from 
the  right  bank  of  the  Rhine  to  Cologne  by 
Agrippa,  iv.  81. 

Ulpia  Trajana,  capital  of  the  Dacians,  vii. 
186;  Roman  colony  at,  195. 

TTlpium  Forum,  the,  vii  202. 

Umbrenus  urges  the  Allobroges  to  join  Cati- 
lina,  i.  209. 

Ummidius  Yerus,  jurisconsult  in  the  reigD 
of  Antoninus  Pius,  vii.  405. 

Unelli,  campaign  of  Sabinus  against  the,  i. 
289,  291.  Defeated  by  Sabinus,  294. 

Ur,  city  of,  of  Scripture,  i.  418. 

Urban  cohorts  in  the  time  of  Tiberius,  v. 
143. 

Usipetes,  a German  race,  their  invasion  of 
Belgium,  i.  366.  Chastised  by  Drusus,  iv. 
179/266. 

Utica,  capital  of  the  Roman  province  of 
Africa,  ii.  165.  Great  muster  of  the  re- 
publican chiefs  at,  285.  Saved  from  de- 
struction by  Cato,  287.  His  endeavours 
to  defend  the  city  against  the  Ca?sarians, 
298.  Sum  exacted  by  Caesar  from  the 
citizens,  303. 

Uxellodunum,  the  last  stronghold  of  the 
Gauls,  stormed  and  taken  by  Caesar,  ii.  37. 

ACCAEI,  a Spanish  tribe,  i.  155. 
Yadimonian  lake,  battle  of  the,  i.  191. 

Yalens,  Fabius,  legate  of  a legion  on  the 
Rhine,  incites  Yitellius  to  claim  the  em- 
pire, vi.  318.  His  crimes,  319.  Advances 
through  Gaul  to  Italy,  322.  His  rapacity 
and  violence  on  his  route,  323.  Tampers 
with  the  praetorians,  325.  Sends  troops 
to  Forum  Julii,  331.  Insubordination  in 
his  camp.  333.  His  despatches  to  the 
senate,  339.  Allows  his  troops  to  plun- 
der the  cities  of  Italy,  339.  Meets  Vitel- 
.ius  at  Lugdunum,  340.  He  and  Caecina 
the  real  governors  of  the  empire,  353. 
Re-embodies  the  praetorian  and  urban 
guards,  354.  His  doubtful  conduct,  356 
Quits  Italy  for  the  Narbonensis,  taken 
prisoner  in  the  Stoechades  islands,  359, 
Slain  at  Urbinum.  and  his  head  exhibited 
to  the  Flavians,  362. 

Yalerius  Asiaticus,  his  conduct  on  the  assas- 


INDEX. 


56  7 


elnation  of  Cains,  v.  865.  Aspires  to  the 
empire,  36S.  Consul  a.f.  800,  416.  Charg- 
es brought  against  him  by  Messalina,  416. 
Suicide  of  his  wife,  417.  Acquitted,  but 
destroys  himself,  418. 

Varinius,  the  praetor,  defeated  by  Spartacus, 

i.  50. 

Yarius  Rufus,  L.,  his  friendship  with  Maece- 
nas, iii.  216. 

Yarro,  M.  Terentius,  lieutenant  of  Fompeius 
in  Spain,  Caesar’s  opinion  of  him,  ii.  128. 
II is  literary  character,  131.  His  unfitness 
for  military  command,  131.  Has  two 
legions  under  him  in  the  south  and  west 
of  Spain,  132.  His  supineness,  133.  His 
vacillating  conduct  and  submission  to  Cae- 
sar, 160-162.  Appointed  keeper  of  the 
first  public  library  at  Rome,  336.  Left  by 
Augustus  to  chastise  the  Alpine  moun- 
taineers, iv.  63. 

Yarro,  Cingonius,  consul-designate,  put  to 
death,  vi.  295. 

Yarns,  Arrius,  appointed  prefect  of  the  prae- 
torians, vi.  373. 

Yarns,  Attius,  retreats  before  Caesar,  ii.  102. 
Commands  the  Pompeian  forces  in  Africa, 
165.  Joined  by  Juba  and  Scipio,  2S3. 
His  dispute  with  Scipio  at  Utica,  287. 
Escapes  from  Africa,  305.  Joins  the  dis- 
affected legions  in  Spain,  315.  His  defeat 
and  death.  317. 

Yarns,  Quintilius,  crushes  a revolt  in  Judea, 

v.  270.  Appointed  by  Augustus  to  the 
command  of  the  legions  in  Germany,  iv. 
269.  Irritation  caused  by  his  indiscreet 
mode  of  governing  the  Germans,  270. 
Intrigues  of  Arminius,  271.  Advance  of 
Yarns  into  the  forest  of  Teutoburg,  272. 
Attacked  on  his  retreat,  and  finally  over- 
powered with  the  loss  of  three  legions, 
272,  273.  The  scene  of  this  slaughter  re- 
visited by  Germanicus,  v.  33.  Funeral 
honours  paid  to  the  remains  of  the  slaugh- 
tered Romans,  33. 

Varus,  Quintilius,  son  of  the  preceding,  pros- 
ecuted for  treason  or  licentiousness,  v.  202. 

Yatinius,  P.,  elected  praetor,  i.  339.  Defend- 
ed by  Cicero,  359.  Gains  an  advantage 
over  * Octavius  at  sea,  ii.  266.  Becomes 
consul,  280.  Commands  for  Antonius  at 
Dyrrachium,  iii.  158. 

Vectigalia,  Nero’s  proposal  to  abolish  the, 

vi.  87,  88. 

Yeiento,  Fabricius.  accused  of  libelling  the 
senate,  vi.  116.  Banished  and  his  books 
burnt,  117. 

Veii,  settlement  of  the  Roman  colony  of, 

ii.  328. 

Velabrum.  the,  at  Rome,  described,  iv.  388. 

Yeleda,  a German  prophetess,  priestess,  and 
queen  of  the  Bructeri,  court  paid  to  her 
by  Civilis,  vi.  402. 

Yeleia,  tablet  of.  vii.  20S. 

V elleius  Paterculus,  v.  230.  His  character 
of  Sextus  Pompeius,  iii.  185. 

Velocasses,  a Belgian  tribe,  join  the  confed- 
eracy formed  against  the  Romans,  i.  267. 

Yeneti,  a Gallic  tribe,  i.  281.  Compelled  by 
P.  Crassus  to  submit  to  him.  282,  283. 
Their  war  with  Ca-sar,  289-191.  Their 
mode  of  warfare,  291.  Defeated  by  the 
navy  under  Decimus  Brutus,  292.  293. 


Yennones,  an  Alpine  tribe,  defeated  by  P. 
Silius,  iv.  160. 

Ventidius  Bassus,  Publius,  apocryphal  ex- 
ploit of,  iii.  122.  Joins  Antonius  with 
three  legions  at  Yada,  124.  Made  consul 
suffectus,  156.  His  remarkable  story,  155. 
Places  himself  under  the  command  of  L. 
Antonius.  179.  His  successes  over  the  Par- 
thians,  190,  191.  Besieges  Antiochus  in 
Samosata,  192.  Granted  a triumph,  192, 
219. 

Yenutius,  king  of  the  Brigantes,  vii.  36. 
Driven  away  by  his  wife  Cartismandua, 
39.  Recovers  his  throne,  39. 

Yeranius,  prosecutes  Cn.  Piso,  v.  82.  Ap- 
pointed governor  of  Britain,  a.d.  61, 

vi.  42. 

Yercellas,  annihilation  of  the  Cimbri  near 

i.  206. 

Yercingetorix,  excites  the  Arverni  to  revolt, 

ii.  12.  Persuades  the  Gauls  to  change 
their  mode  of  warfare,  16.  Consents  to 
spare  Avaricum,  17.  Declines  a battle 
with  C'ajsar,  20.  Repulses  Caesar  at  Ger- 
govia,  22.  His  great  preparations  for 
meeting  the  Romans,  26.  Defeated,  29. 
Occupies  the  fortified  camp  of  Alesia.  29. 
Surrenders  himself  to  Casar,  33.  Led  in 
Ca?sar’s  triumph  and  strangled  at  Rome, 
34,  809. 

Yergobret,  or  chief  magistrate,  of  the  Gauls, 
i.  234. 

Yeromandui,  a Belgian  tribe,  join  the  con- 
federacy formed  against  the  Romans,  i. 
267. 

Yerres,  his  spoliation  of  the  province  of 
Sicily,  i.  71.  Prosecuted,  71.  Admits  his 
guilt,  and  retires  into  exile,  72.  Put  to 
death,  iii.  140  note". 

Yerulamium,  or  St.  Albans,  i.  388. 

Yerus,  L.  Ceionius  Commodus,  adopted  by 
Hadrian  as  his  successor  in  the  empire, 

vii.  385.  His  character,  385.  His  conduct 
in  the  field,  387.  His  premature  death, 
3S7. 

Yerus,  M.  Annius.  See  Aurelius. 

Yerus,  L.,  adopted  by  Antoninus,  vii.  888, 
409.  Associated  by  M.  Aurelius  with  him- 
self in  the  empire,  451.  Assumes  the  com- 
mand in  Syria,  454.  His  reverses,  455. 
And  victories,  455.  Intrigues  to  over- 
throw his  colleague  and  patron,  M.  Aure- 
lius, 457.  Triumphs  with  Aurelius,  457. 
Inroads  of  the  barbarians,  and  supinenesa 
of  Yerus,  461.  Joins  Aurelius  in  the  wars 
against  the  Quadi  and  Marcomanni,  464, 
465.  His  return  and  death,  465. 
Yespasian,  Flavius,  his  campaigns  in  Bri- 
tain, vi.  22,  27.  Commands  the  forces 
destined  for  the  reduction  of  Judea,  296. 
In  Judea,  315,  428,  429.  Reduces  Gali- 
lee, Joppa,  Tiberias,  and  Taricha’a,  434- 
436.  Takes  Peraa,  437.  Watches  the 
movements  of  Galba  and  Otho,  438.  De- 
putes his  son  Titus  to  open  the  S/ege 
of  Jerusalem,  454.  His  triumph,  471. 
Annexes  Palestine  to  the  empire,  473. 
His  origin  and  early  career,  346-34S 
His  cause  espoused  by  the  Syrian  legions 
349.  Proclaimed  emperor  at  Alexandria, 
349.  Prepares  to  contest  the  empire.  350. 
Marches  upon  Alexandria,  360.  Date  oi 


508 


INDEX. 


his  prineipatc,  374.  Declines  aid  from 
Part  hi  a,  377.  Vexed  at  the  vices  of  his 
Bon  Domitian,  878.  Assumes  something 
of  a divine  character  in  the  eyes  of  the 
Romans,  880.  Works  miraculous  cures  at 
Alexandria,  381.  Arrives  at  Rome,  382. 
Revolts  in  the  provinces,  384,  et  aeq. 
Closes  the  temple  of  Janus,  vii.  10.  Ap- 
plauded for  peace  by  the  Romans,  14. 
His  firmness,  vigilance,  and  moderation, 
16.  His  personal  appearance  and  habits, 
19,  20.  Revision  of  the  senate,  21.  De- 
molishes Nero’s  golden  bouse,  24.  Re- 
stores the  Capitol,  24.  A deficit  in  the 
finances,  24,  25.  His  parsimony  unjustly 
stigmatised,  25.  Reconstitutes  the  older 
colonies,  26.  His  architectural  works,  27. 
His  endowment  of  literature,  28.  His 
measures  against  the  philosophers,  30. 
His  erection  of  the  Colosseum,  36.  His 
death  and  character,  40,  41. 

Vestal  virgins.  Domitian’s  zeal  for  the  pu- 
rity of  the,  vii.  103.  His  inquisition  into 
their  character,  104  Punishment  of  the 
culprits,  106. 

Vesuvius,  its  appearance  in  the  time  of  Ti- 
berius, v.  207.  Changes  in  its  physical  as- 
pect, vii.  54.  Great  eruption  of,  53-61. 

Vettius,  L.,  an  informer  in  the  pay  of  the 
senate,  i.  143.  His  mysterious  disclosures 
of  a plot  for  assassinating  Pompeius  and 
Ciesar,  174  His  imprisonment  and  death, 
174 

Yetus,  Lucius,  put  to  death  with  his  mother- 
in-law  and  daughter,  vi.  158. 

Vibullius,  Rufus,  sent  by  Pompeius  into 
Spain,  ii.  128, 129. 

Vienna,  in  Gaul,  capital  of  the  Allobroges, 
early  Roman  colony  at,  iv.  74. 

Viminal  Hill,  the,  in  the  time  of  Augustus, 
iv.  375. 

Vindelicia,  formidable  position  of,  iv.  159. 
Incursions  of  the  Vindelicians  into  the 
Cisalpine,  159.  Completely  subjugated  by 
Tiberius,  160,  177. 

Vindex,  Julius,  a Gallo-Roman  of  Aquitania, 
makes  overtures  to  Galba  for  a revolt 
against  Nero,  vi.  280.  Conspires  with  Vir- 
ginius,  and  slays  himself  at  Vesontio,  280. 
Nero  hears  of  his  revolt,  283. 

Vine,  alleged  edict  of  Domitian  respecting 
the  cultivation  of  the,  vii.  115. 

Vinicianus,  his  conspiracy  against  Claudius 
and  condemnation,  v.  409-411. 

Vinicius,  Marcus,  chastises  the  Germans,  iv. 
71,  237.  Married  to  Julia,  daughter  of 
Germanicus,  v.  249. 

Vinius,  T„  an  adherent  of  Galba,  accompa- 
nies him  to  Rome,  vi.  294  Becomes  con- 
sul with  the  emperor  Galba,  296.  Saves 
the  life  of  Tigellinus,  302.  Murdered  in 
the  Forum,  311. 

Vlpsania,  daughter  of  Agrippa,  iv.  169  note  L 
Married  to  Tiberius,  170.  Divorced,  170, 
182.  Married  to  Asinius  Gallus,  v.  217. 

Virgil,  confiscation  and  restoration  of  his 
patrimony,  iii.  177 ; iv.  439.  Taken  into 
favour  by  Octavius  and  Mascenas,  iii.  177, 
216.  The  celebrated  prophecy  in  his 
fourth  Eclogue,  1S3.  His  thrilling  senti- 
ments in  the  first  Georgic,  239.  His  de- 
scription of  the  battle  of  Actium,  254 


His  story  of  Aristceus,  iv.  53.  UrgM 
by  Augustus  to  send  him  a specimen 
of  his  forthcoming  epic,  66.  His 
verses  on  the  death  of  Marcellus,  133. 
His  enthusiasm,  439.  Remarks  on  his 
“Eclogues”  and  “Georgies,”  440.  And 
on  his  “JEneid,”  443.  His  melancholy, 
447.  Ilis  death,  448.  llis  personal  ap- 
pearance, 449.  His  works  commanded  by 
Caius  to  be  removed  from  the  public  libra- 
ries, v.  33S. 

Virgilius,  commands  for  Scipio  in  Thapsus, 
ii.  294 

Virginius,  Rufus,  commander  of  the  legions 
in  Lower  Germany,  conspires  with  Vindex 
against  Nero,  vi.  280.  Refuses  the  title  of 
imperator,  2S1.  Alarm  of  Nero  at  the 
news  of  Virginius’s  revolt,  234.  Carried 
off  by  Galba  to  Rome,  297.  Consul-desig- 
nate, 326.  Again  refuses  the  empire,  338. 
His  narrow  escape  from  the  soldiers,  338, 
343. 

Vitellius,  Aulus,  his  early  history  and  char- 
acter, vi.  315,  316.  Proclaimed  emperor 
by  the  Germanic  legions,  319.  Assumes 
the  name  of  Germanicus  and  marches 
upon  Italy,  321.  His  messages  to  Otho, 
324  Defeats  Otho,  who  commits  suicide, 
833-335.  Accepted  by  the  senate  as  em- 
peror, 339.  Ilis  soldiers  plunder  the  Ita- 
lian cities,  339.  His  march  through  Gaul 
to  Italy,  340.  His  indulgence  towards  his 
enemies,  341.  Llis  gluttony,  342.  His 
moderate  edicts,  342.  Waives  the  title  of 
Augustus,  342.  Disbands  the  prietorians 
and  distributes  the  Othonians  among  va- 
rious other  legions,  343.  His  disorderly 
progress  and  brutal  behaviour  on  the  field 
of  Bedriacum,  344  Withheld  from  enter- 
ing Rome  in  the  garb  of  war,  345.  His 
moderate  behaviour  in  the  senate,  and 
indiscreet  comparison  of  himself  with 
Thrasea,  352,  353.  Governed  by  CiEcina 
and  Valens,  353.  Deserted  by  some  prov- 
inces, feebly  supported  by  others,  355. 
His  troops  defeated  at  Bedriacum,  357. 
His  bestiality,  fears,  cruelties,  and  disas- 
ters, 358.  Causes  Junius  Blaesus  to  be 
poisoned,  359.  Ilis  slow  and  cautious 
policy,  360.  Rouses  himself  from  sloth 
and  goes  to  Me  vania,  361.  Brought  back 
to  Rome  by  an  insurrection  in  Campania, 
361.  Offers  to  resign  the  empire,  but  pre- 
vented by  his  soldiers,  362,  363.  Neglects 
to  escape,  and  conceals  himself  in  the 
palace,  370.  Dragged  from  his  hiding- 
place  and  slain,  371.  Remarks  on  his 
character,  372.  Murder  of  his  son,  382. 

Vitellius,  L.,  compelled  to  march  with  Otho 
against  his  brother,  A.  Vitellius,  vi.  330. 
Commands  in  Rome,  361, 363.  Expels  the 
Flavians  from  Tarracina,  368.  Surrenders 
and  is  put  to  death,  373. 

Vitellius,  L.,  father  of  the  emperor,  prefect 
of  Syria  under  Tiberius,  v.  79;  vi.  262. 
Prosecutes  Cn.  Piso,  v.  79,  S2.  Leads  the 
forces  of  Asia  and  Syria  against  the  Par- 
tisans, 263,  417.  Recalls  Pontius  Pilatus 
from  Judea,  271.  His  gross  flattery  of 
Caius  and  Claudius,  of  Messalina  and  the 
Claudian  freedmen,  417.  One  of  the  pros- 
ecutors of  Valerius  Asiaticus,  418.  Gained 


INDEX. 


569 


over  by  Agrippina,  438.  Brings  forward 
a bill  for  marriage  between  uncle  and 
niece,  439.  Does  not  take  part  against 
Messalinu,  447.  Consul  with  Claudius, 
and  left  in  charge  of  Rome  during  the  ab- 
sence of  Claudius  in  Britain,  vi.  24.  Cen- 
sor and  thrice  consul,  315. 

locates,  an  Aquitanian  tribe,  reduced  by  P. 
Crassus,  i.  296. 

Vocontii,  wars  of  Calvinus  against  the,  i. 
196. 

Vocuh,  Dillius,  sent  to  relieve  Castra  Ye- 
tera,  vi.  392.  Succeeds  Hordeonius  Flac- 
eus  in  the  war  against  Civilis,  392.  Re- 
leases Hordeonius,  and  puts  the  ringlead- 
ers to  death,  392-395.  Defeated  by  Civilis, 

396.  Relieves  Vetera,  but  suspected  of 
corresponding  with  the  enemy,  397. 
Takes  shelter  in  Gelduba  and  Novesium, 

397.  Escapes,  and  saves  Moguntiacum, 
393.  Put  to  death  by  Classicus,  400. 

Yolcae,  the  Tectosages  of  the,,  defeated  by 
the  Romans,  i.  206.  Their  incursions  into 
the  south  of  Gaul,  226. 

Yologesus,  chief  of  the  Bessi,  leads  an  un- 
successful revolt  of  the  Thracians,  iv. 
188. 

Yologesus,  king  of  Parthia,  his  treatment  of 
Pietus  and  his  two  legions,  vi.  267.  Oifers 
40,000  horsemen  to  Vespasian  for  the  con- 
quest of  Judea,  377. 

Yologesus,  a later  king  of  Parthia,  lays 
claim  to  Armenia,  vii.  455.  Defeated,  456. 
Sues  for  peace,  457. 

Yolusenus,  sent  by  Caesar  to  explore  the 
coast  of  Britain,  i.  378.  Commissioned  by 
Labienus  to  assassinate  the  Atrebate  Com- 
mius,  ii.  38.  Follows  him  from  place  to 
place,  38. 

Vonones,  son  of  Phraates,  ascends  the  throne 
of  Parthia,  v.  51.  Dethroned  by  his  sub- 
lets, and  takes  refuge  in  Armenia,  51. 
Kept  in  custody  by  Silanus,  proconsul  of 
Syria,  51.  His  cause  undertaken  by  Cn. 
Calpumius  Piso,  64. 


WAR,  the  laws  of,  as  understood  by  the 
Romans,  i.  402. 

Wines  of  Greece  and  Asia  imported  into 
Rome,  iv.  316.  Domitian’s  edict  respect- 
ing the  cultivation  of  the  vine,  vii.  115. 
Women,  superstitious  veneration  paid  by 
the  Germans  to,  i.  260.  Political  nullity  of 
the  Roman  women,  and  their  consequent 
security  in  times  of  revolution,  318.  Ro- 
man laws  and  customs  of  marriage,  ii.  409 ; 
iv.  30.  Marriage  fallen  into  disfavour  and 
desuetude,  32,  Influence  of  the  freed 


women,  SO.  Servitude  of  married  wo- 
men, 34.  And  struggles  of  the  women 
against  it,  35.  Laws  of  the  republic  en- 
forcing marriage,  36.  Penalties  for  un- 
chastity, 40.  The  character  of  the  Augus- 
tan age  fatal  to  female  virtue,  204.  Shame- 
lessness of  both  sexes  in  the  reign  of 
Augustus,  v.  154.  Punishment  for  adul- 
tery, and  mode  of  escaping  from  the 
consequences,  154.  Terrible  significance 
of  the  fact  of  the  absence  of  prtenomens 
among  women,  166  note'1.  Influence  of 
women  over  the  emperor  Claudius,  414. 
The  first  deadly  rivalry  of  women  in 
Rome,  422.  Women  admitted  to  a con- 
spiracy against  the  life  of  Nero,  vi.  145. 
Attractiveness  of  the  Syrian  worship  of 
the  elements  to  the  lower  order  of  Roman 
women,  200-202.  Prevalence  of  suicide 
among  them,  vii.  258. 

Woollen  goods  of  Asm  Minor,  ancient  trace 
in,  iv.  316. 

XANTHUS,  capital  of  Lycia,  pillaged  by 
M.  Brutus,  iii.  161 ; iv.  108.  Com- 
pensated by  Augustus,  108. 

Xenophon,  Claudius’s  physician,  v.  453. 
Poisons  his  master,  457. 

P7AMA,  capital  of  Numidia,  Juba’s  prepara- 
Ll  tions  at,  in  case  of  a defeat,  ii.  301.  Sale 
of  J uba’s  property  at,  304. 

Zarmanochanus,  an  Indian  sage,  admitted 
to  the  Eleusinian  mysteries,  and  burns 
himself  on  a funeral  pyre  at  Athens,  iv. 
119. 

Zeolots,  the  party  of  independence  in  Jeru- 
salem, vi.  427, 428.  Their  Sicarii,  or  secret 
assassins,  425.  The  most  prominent  of 
the  chiefs  of  the  Zealots,  429.  Compared 
with  the  Montagnards  of  the  French  rev- 
olution, 447.  They  massacre  the  moderate 
party,  and  assume  the  government,  448. 
Divided  into  three  factions,  449.  Overawe 
the  citizens  of  Jerusalem,  457, 458.  Refuse 
terms  from  the  Romans,  under  Titus,  462. 
Defend  the  Upper  City,  466.  Disturbances 
caused  by  a remnant  of  the  Zealots  in 
Alexandria,  vii.  284. 

Zela,  battle  of,  ii.  272. 

Zeno,  son  of  Polemo,  king  of  Pontus,  crown 
ed  king  of  Armenia  by  Germanicus,  v.  63. 
Zenodorus,  the  tetrarch,  deprived  of  his  ter- 
ritories, iv.  114. 

Zermizegethusa  (Ulpia  Trajana),  the  capital 
of  the  Dacians,  vii.  1S5.  Roman  colony 
at,  195. 

Zeugma,  importance  of  the  town  of,  i.  419. 
Crassus  at,  41-8.  Trajan  at,  vii.  801 1 304. 


THE 


Historical  Reference -Book, 

COMPRISING  I 

A Chronological  Table  of  Universal  History,  a Chronological  Diction- 
ary of  Universal  History,  a Biographical  Dictionary. 

WITH  GEOGRAPHICAL,  NOTES. 

FOR  THE  USE  OF  STUDENTS,  TEACHERS,  AND  READERS. 
By  LOUIS  HEILPRIN. 


New  edition.  Crown  Svo.  Half  leather,  $3.C0. 


“ A second  re-vised  edition  of  Mr.  Louis  Heilprin’s  ‘ Historical  Reference-Book  ’ has 
just  appeared,  marking  the  well-earned  success  of  this  admirable  work — a dictionary 
of  dates,  a dictionary  of  events  (with  a special  gazetteer  for  the  places  mentioned),  and 
a concise  biographical  dictionary,  all  in  one,  and  all  in  the  highest  degree  trustworthy. 
Mr.  Heilprin’s  revision  is  as  thorough  as  his  original  work.  Any  one  can  test  it  by 
running  over  the  list  of  persons  deceased  since  this  manual  first  appeared.  Correc- 
tions, too,  have  been  made,  as  we  can  testily  in  one  instance  at  least.” — New  York 
Evening  Post. 

“ One  of  the  most  complete,  compact,  and  valuable  works  of  reference  yet  pro- 
duced.”— Troy  Daily  Times. 

“ Unequaled  in  its  field.” — Boston  Courier. 

“A  small  library  in  itself.” — Chicago  Dial. 

“An  invaluable  book  of  reference,  useful  alike  to  the  student  and  the  general  reader. 
The  arrangement  could  scarcely  be  better  or  more  convenient.” — New  York  Herald. 

“The  conspectus  of  the  world’s  history  presented  in  the  first  part  of  the  hook  is  as 
full  as  the  wisest  terseness  could  put  within  the  space.” — Philadelphia  American. 

“We  miss  hardly  anything  that  we  should  consider  desirable,  and  we  have  not  been 
able  to  detect  a single  mistake  or  misprint.” — New  York  Nation. 

“So  far  as  we  have  tested  the  accuracy  of  the  present  work  we  have  found  it  with- 
out flaw.” — Christian  Union. 

“ The  conspicuous  merits  of  the  work  are  condensation  and  accuracy.  These  points 
alone  should  suffice  to  give  the  ‘ Historical  Reference-Book  ’ a place  in  every  public 
and  private  library.” — Boston  Beacon. 

“The  method  of  the  tabulation  is  admirable  for  ready  reference.” — New  York 
Home  Journal. 

“This  cyclopaedia  of  condensed  knowledge  is  a work  that  will  speedily  become  a 
necessity  to  the  general  reader,  as  well  as  to  the  student.” — Detroit  Free  Press. 

“For  clearness,  correctness,  and  the  readiness  with  which  the  reader  can  find  the 
information  of  which  he  is  in  search,  the  volume  is  far  in  advance  of  any  work  of  its 
kind  with  which  we  are  acquainted.” — Boston  Saturday  Evening  Gazette. 

“The  latest  dates  have  been  given.  The  geographical  notes  which  accompany 
the  historical  incidents  are  a novel  addition,  and  exceedingly  helpful.  The  size  also 
commends  it,  making  it  convenient  for  constant  reference,  while  the  three  divisions 
and  careful  elimination  of  minor  and  uninteresting  incidents  make  it  much  easier  to 
find  dates  and  events  about  which  accuracy  is  necessary.  Sir  William  Hamilton  avers 
that  too  retentive  a memory  tends  to  hinder  the  development  of  the  . judgment  by  pre- 
senting too  much  for  decision.  A work  like  this  is  thus  better  than  memory,  it  is  a 
* mental  larder  ’ which  needs  no  care,  and  whose  contents  are  ever  available.” — New 
York  University  Quarterly. 


New  York:  D.  APPLETON  & CO.,  1,  3,  & 5 Bend  Street. 


D.  APPLETON  & CO.’S  PUBLICATIONS. 


HIS TOR  Y OF  ENGLAND  IN  THE  EIGHT- 
EENTH CENTURY.  By  William  E.  H.  Lecky,  author 
of  “ History  of  the  Rise  and  Influence  of  the  Spirit  of  Rational- 
ism in  Europe,”  etc.  Complete  in  eight  volumes.  Crown  8vo. 
Cloth,  per  vol.,  $2.25  ; half  calf,  $36.00  per  set. 


“ On  every  ground  which  should  render  a history  of  eighteenth-century  England 
precious  to  thinking  men,  Mr.  Lecky’s  work  may  be  commended.  The  materials  ac- 
cumulated in  these  volumes  attest  an  industry  more  strenuous  and  comprehensive  than 
that  exhibited  by  Froude  or  by  Macaulay.  But  it  is  his  supreme  merit  that  he  leaves 
on  the  reader’s  mind  a conviction  that  he  not  only  possesses  the  acuteness  which  can 
discern  the  truth,  but  the  unflinching  purpose  of  truth-telling.” — New  York  Sun. 


BANCROFT’S  HISTORY  OF  THE  UNITED 

JHJ  ST  A TES,  from  the  Discovery  of  the  Continent  to  the  Estab- 
lishment of  the  Constitution  in  1789.  By  George  Bancroft. 
Complete  in  six  volumes,  8vo.  Cloth,  uncut,  gilt  top,  per  set, 
$15.00  ; half  calf,  or  half  morocco,  $27.00  ; full  morocco,  $50.00. 


The  six  volumes  of  this  new  and  fully  revised  edition  of  Bancroft’s  “ His- 
tory of  the  United  States,”  now  complete,  comprise  the  twelve  volumes  of 
the  original  octavo  edition,  including  the  “ History  of  the  Formation  of  the 
Constitution,”  last  published,  and  are  issued  at  just  half  the  price.  Volume 
VI  contains  a new  Portrait  of  Bancroft  engraved  on  Steel. 


TTISTOR  Y OF  THE  PEOPLE  OF  THE 

Jl  Jl  UNITED  STATES,  from  the  Revolution  to  the  Civil 
War.  By  John  Bach  McMaster.  To  be  completed  in  five 
volumes.  Volumes  I,  II,  and  III  now  ready.  8vo.  Cloth, 
gilt  top,  $2.50  each. 


HrilE  HOUSEHOLD  HL STORY  OF  THE 

■l  UNITED  STA  TES  AND  ITS  PEOPLE.  For  Young 
Americans.  By  Edward  Eggleston.  Richly  illustrated  with 
350  Drawings,  75  Maps,  etc.  Square  8vo.  Cloth,  $2.50. 

This  work  is  illustrated  in  a novel  and  strikingly  effective  manner.  En- 
gravings adorn  every  page,  and  appear  in  the  text  and  in  the  margins.  There 
are  full-page  illustrations  in  colors,  maps  in  colors  line  the  covers,  and  many 
small  maps  are  inserted  in  the  text.  The  work  is  handsomely  printed,  and 
bound  in  a very  attractive  manner. 


New  York : D.  APPLETON  & CO.,  1,  3,  & 5 Bond  Street. 


D.  APPLETON  & CO.’S  PUBLICATIONS. 


RO  UND  AND  ABO  UT  SO  UTH  AMERICA  t 

Twenty  Months  of  Quest  and  Query.  By  Frank  Vincent, 
author  of  “ The  Land  of  the  White  Elephant,”  etc.  With  Maps, 
Plans,  and  54  full-page  Illustrations.  8vo,  xxiv  + 473  pages. 
Ornamental  cloth,  $5.00. 


No  former  traveler  has  made  so  comprehensive  and  thorough  a tour  of 
Spanish  and  Portuguese  America  as  did  Mr.  Vincent.  He  visited  every 
capital,  chief  city,  and  important  seaport,  made  several  expeditions  into  the 
interior  of  Brazil  and  the  Argentine  Republic,  and  ascended  the  Parand, 
Paraguay,  Amazon,  Orinoco,  and  Magdalena  Rivers ; he  visited  the  crater 
of  Pichinchas,  16,000  feet  above  the  sea-level  ; he  explored  falls  in  the  center 
of  the  continent,  which,  though  meriting  the  title  of  “Niagara  of  South 
America,”  are  all  but  unknown  to  the  outside  world;  he  spent  months  in 
the  picturesque  capital  of  Rio  Janeiro  ; he  visited  the  coffee  districts,  studied 
the  slaves,  descended  the  gold-mines,  viewed  the  greatest  rapids  of  the  globe, 
entered  the  isolated  Guianas,  and  so  on. 


JN  AND  OUT  OF  CENTRAL  AMERICA ; and 


other  Sketches  and  Studies  of  Travel.  By  Frank  Vincent. 
With  Maps  and  Illustrations.  i2mo.  Cloth,  §2.00. 


RAZTL  : Its  Condition  and  Prospects . By  C.  C.  Andrews, 
ex-Consul-General  to  Brazil.  i2mo.  Cloth,  $1.50. 


“ I hope  I may  be  able  to  present  some  facts  in  respect  to  the  present  situation  of 
Brazil  which  will  be  both  instructive  and  entertaining  to  general  readers.  My  means 
of  acquaintance  with  that  empire  are  principally  derived  from  a residence  of  three 
years  at  Rio  de  Janeiro,  its  capital,  while  employed  in  the  service  of  the  United  States 
Government,  during  which  period  I made  a few  journeys  into  the  interior/’ — From 
the  Preface . 


CHINA : Travels  and  Investigations  in  the  “ Middle 
Kingdom A Study  of  its  Civilization  and  Possibilities. 
With  a Glance  at  Japan.  By  James  Harrison  Wilson,  late 
Major-General  United  States  Volunteers  and  Brevet  Major- 
General  United  States  Army.  i2mo.  Cloth,  $1.75. 

“The  book  presents  China  and  Japan  in  all  these  aspects;  the  manners  and  cus- 
toms of  the  people ; the  institutions,  tendencies,  and  social  ideas ; the  government  and 
leading  men.” — Boston  Traveller . 


New  York : D.  APPLETON  & CO.,  I,  3,  & 5 Bond  Street. 


D.  APPLETON  & CO.’S  PUBLICATIONS. 


PPLE T 0 NS 9 STUDENTS'  LIBRARY.  Con- 
sisting of  Thirty-four  Volumes  on  subjects  in  Science,  History, 
Literature,  and  Biography.  In  neat  i8mo  volumes,  bound  in 
half  leather,  in  uniform  style.  Each  set  put  up  in  a box.  Sold 
in  sets  only.  Price,  per  set,  $20.00.  Containing  : 


Homer.  By  W.  E.  Gladstone.  ) 1 
Shakspere.  By  E.  Dowden.  > vol. 

English  Literature.  By  S.  A.  i 
Brooke.  > 

Greek  Literature.  ByR.  C.  Jebb.  J 
Philology.  By  J.  Peile.  J 

English  Composition.  By  J.  > 
Nichol.  ) 

Geography.  By  G.  Grove.  } 

Classical  Geography.  By  H.  F.  > 
Tozer.  ) 

Introduction  to  Science  Prim-  ) 
ers.  By  T.  H.  Huxley.  > 

Physiology.  By  M.  Forster.  ) 

Chemistry.  By  H.  E.  Roscoe.  ) 

Phvsics.  By  Balfour  Stewart.  > 

Geology.  By  A.  Geikie.  ? 

Botany.  By  J.  D.  Hooker.  j 

Astronomy.  By  J.  N.  Lockyer.  'i 
Physical  Geography.  By  A.  > 
Geikie.  ) 

Political  Economy.  By  W.  S.  I 
Jevons.  > 

Logic.  By  W.  S.  Jevons.  ) 

History  of  Europe.  By  E.  A.  1 
Freeman.  ^ 

History  of  France.  By  C.  M.  [ 
Yonge.  J 

History  of  Rome.  By  M.  Creigh-  1 
ton.  1 

History  of  Greece.  By  C.  A.  f 
Fyffe.  J 

Old  Greek  Life.  By  J.  P.  Ma- j 

HAFFY. 

Roman  Antiquities.  By  A.  S.  [ 
Wilkins.  J 

Sophocles.  By  Lewis  Campbell.  ? 
Euripides.  By  J.  P.  Mahaffy.  J 
Vergil.  By  Prof.  H.  Nettleship.  ? 
Livy.  By  W.  W.  Capes.  ) 

Demosthenes.  ByS.  H.  Butcher.  ? 
Milton.  By  S.  A.  Brooke.  J 


The  Apostolic  Fathers  and  the 
Apologists.  By  Rev.  G.  A.  Jackson. 
The  Fathers  of  the  Third  Century. 

By  Rev.  G.  A.  Jackson. 

Thomas  Carlyle:  His  Life,  his  Books, 
his  Theories.  By  A.  H.  Guernsey. 
Ralph  Waldo  Emerson,  Philosopher 
and  Poet.  By  A.  H.  Guernsey. 
Macaulay:  His  Life,  his  Writings.  By 
C.  H.  Jones. 

Short  Life  of  Charles  Dickens.  By 
C.  H.  Jones. 

Short  Life  of  Gladstone.  By  C.  H. 
Jones. 

Ruskin  on  Painting. 

Town  Geology.  By  Charles  Kingsley. 
The  Childhood  of  Religions.  By  E. 
Clodd. 

History  of  the  Early  Church.  By 
E.  M.  Sewell. 

The  Art  of  Speech.  Poetry  and  Prose. 

By  L.  T.  Townsend. 

The  Art  of  Speech.  Eloquence  and 
Logic.  By  L.  T.  Townsend. 

The  World’s  Paradises.  By  S.  G.  W. 
Benjamin. 

The  Great  German  Composers.  By 
G.  T.  Ferris. 

The  Great  Italian  and  French  Com- 
posers. By  G.  T.  Ferris. 

Great  Singers.  First  Series.  By  G. 
T.  Ferris. 

Great  Singers.  Second  Series.  By  G. 
T.  Ferris. 

Great  Violinists  and  Pianists.  By 
G.  T.  Ferris. 


PPLE  T ON S ' ATLAS  OP  THE  UN. L TED 

STATES.  Consisting  of  General  Maps  of  the  United  States 
and  Territories,  and  a County  Map  of  each  of  the  States,  printed 
in  Colors.  Imperial  8vo.  Cloth,  $1.50. 


The  Atlas  also  contains  Descriptive  Text  outlining  the  History,  Geography,  and 
Political  and  Educational  Organization  of  the  States,  with  latest  Statistics  of  their 
Resources  and  Industries. 


NEW  -YORK:  D.  APPLETON  & CO.,  PUBLISHERS. 


D.  APPLETON  & CO.’S  PUBLICATIONS. 


USEFUL  BOOKS  FOR  LITERARY  WORKERS. 


'HE  VERSA  LI  ST.  A Manual  devoted  to  Brief  Discus- 
sions of  the  Right  and  the  Wrong  Use  of  Words,  and  to  some 
other  Matters  of  Interest  to  those  who  would  Speak  and  Write 
with  Propriety.  By  Alfred  Ayres.  i8mo.  Cloth,  $1.00. 

'IIE  ORTHOEPIST.  A Pronouncing  Manual,  contain- 
ing about  Three  Thousand  Five  Hundred  Words,  including  a 
considerable  Number  of  the  Names  of  Foreign  Authors,  Art- 
ists, etc.,  that  are  often  mispronounced.  By  Alfred  Ayres. 
i8mo.  Cloth,  $1.00. 


''THE  RHYMESTER  j or  the  Rules  of  Rhyme.  A 
J-  Guide  to  English  Versification.  With  a Dictionary  of  Rhymes, 
an  Examination  of  Classical  Measures,  and  Comments  upon 
Burlesque,  Comic  Verse,  and  Song-Writing.  By  the  late  Tom 
Hood.  Edited  by  Arthur  Penn.  i8mo.  Cloth,  $1.00. 

rHE  CORRESPONDENT.  By  James  Wood  David- 
son. Small  i2mo.  Cloth,  60  cents.  Information,  with  forms 
of  address,  salutation,  etc. 


£ 


PROPS  IN  THE  USE  OF  ENGLISH.  By  the 
late  William  B.  Hodgson,  LL.  D.,  Professor  of  Political 
Economy  in  the  University  of  Edinburgh.  American  revised 
edition.  i2mo.  Cloth,  $1.50. 


-S' 


LTPS  OF  TONGUE  AND  PEN.  By  J.  H.  Long, 

M.  A.,  Principal  of  Collegiate  Institute,  Peterborough,  Ontario. 
i2mo.  Cloth,  60  cents. 


y f IIE  APT  OF  AUTHORSHIP.  Literary  Reminis- 
-*■  cences,  Methods  of  Work,  and  Advice  to  Young  Beginners. 
Opinions  of  many  Leading  Authors  of  the  Day.  Compiled 
and  edited  by  George  Bainton.  i2mo.  Cloth,  untrimmed 
edges,  $1.25. 


New  York:  D.  APPLETON  & CO.,  1,  3,  & 5 Bond  Street. 


THE 


POPULAR  SCIENCE  MONTHLY. 

Established  by  Eoward  L.  Youmans. 


EDITED  BY  W.  J.  YOUMANS. 


The  Popular  Science  Monthly  will  continue,  as  heretofore,  to  sup- 
ply its  readers  with  the  results  of  the  latest  investigation  and  the  most 
valuable  thought  in  the  various  departments  of  scientific  inquiry. 

Leaving  the  dry  and  technical  details  of  science,  which  are  of  chief 
concern  to  specialists,  to  the  journals  devoted  to  them,  the  Monthly 
deals  with  those  more  general  and  practical  subjects  which  are  of  the 
greatest  interest  and  importance  to  the  public  at  large.  In  this  work 
it  has  achieved  a foremost  position,  and  is  now  the  acknowledged  organ 
of  progressive  scientific  ideas  in  this  country. 

The  wide  range  of  its  discussions  includes,  among  other  topics : 

The  bearing  of  science  upon  education ; 

Questions  relating  to  the  prevention  of  disease  and  the  improvement 
of  sanitary  conditions ; 

Subjects  of  domestic  and  social  economy,  including  the  introduction 
of  better  ways  of  living,  and  improved  applications  in  the  arts  of  every 
kind  ; 

The  phenomena  and  laws  of  the  larger  social  organizations,  with  the 
new  standard  of  ethics,  based  on  scientific  principles ; 

The  subjects  of  personal  and  household  hygiene,  medicine,  and  archi- 
tecture, as  exemplified  in  the  adaptation  of  public  buildings  and  private 
houses  to  the  wants  of  those  who  use  them ; 

Agriculture  and  the  improvement  of  food-products  ; 

The  study  of  man,  with  what  appears  from  time  to  time  in  the  depart- 
ments of  anthropology  and  archmology  that  may  throw  light  upon  ths 
development  of  the  race  from  its  primitive  conditions. 

Whatever  of  real  advance  is  made  in  chemistry,  geography,  astron. 
omy,  physiology,  psychology,  botany,  zoology,  paleontology,  geology,  or 
such  other  department  as  may  have  been  the  field  of  research,  is  recorded 
monthly. 

Special  attention  is  also  called  to  the  biographies,  with  portraits,  of 
representative  scientific  men.  in  which  are  recorded  their  most  marked 
achievements  in  science,  and  the  general  bearing  of  their  work  indicated 
and  its  value  estimated. 


Terms:  $5.00  per  annum,  in  advance. 

The  New  York  Medical  Journal  and  The  Popular  Science 
Monthly  to  the  same  address,  $9.00  per  annum  (full  price, 
$10.00).  


New  York:  D,  APPLETON  & CO.,  1,  3,  & 5 Bond  Street. 


Date  Due 

Apr28’3a& 

L.  B.  Cat.  No.  1137 

927  M563  P v.7  3'6308':" 


- 


